The devas are not capable of seeing him

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
one_awakening
Posts: 216
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2017 6:04 am

The devas are not capable of seeing him

Post by one_awakening »

Can someone explain what "The devas are not capable of seeing him" means in the following?

In whom exist no inner stirrings,
Having passed beyond being this or that,
Free from fear, blissful and sorrowless,
The devas are not capable of seeing him.
“You only lose what you cling to”
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 9770
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: The devas are not capable of seeing him

Post by Ceisiwr »

one_awakening wrote: Fri Apr 03, 2020 2:00 am Can someone explain what "The devas are not capable of seeing him" means in the following?

In whom exist no inner stirrings,
Having passed beyond being this or that,
Free from fear, blissful and sorrowless,
The devas are not capable of seeing him.
Can’t pin down the Buddha or Arahants as the self has ceased.
Saññāvirattassa na santi ganthā,
Paññāvimuttassa na santi mohā;
Saññañca diṭṭhiñca ye aggahesuṃ,
Te ghaṭṭayantā vicaranti loke”ti.


“For one detached from perception, there exist no ties,
for one by wisdom freed, no delusions are there,
but those who have grasped perceptions and views,
they wander the world stirring up strife."


Māgaṇḍiya Sutta
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 6410
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: The devas are not capable of seeing him

Post by SDC »

one_awakening wrote: Fri Apr 03, 2020 2:00 am Can someone explain what "The devas are not capable of seeing him" means in the following?

In whom exist no inner stirrings,
Having passed beyond being this or that,
Free from fear, blissful and sorrowless,
The devas are not capable of seeing him.
What's the source of this?

If you take in the sense of, "One sees me sees the Dhamma", then it could just be implying that as great as a deva is in stature they are not as great as the Buddha.
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 17920
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: The devas are not capable of seeing him

Post by mikenz66 »

Here's the Sutta Udana 2.10
“For he who has no agitations inside the mind,
Who has thus completely transcended continuity of existence,
The devas are unable to see
He who is without fear, happy, and griefless.”
https://suttacentral.net/ud2.10/en/anandajoti
There are a number of similar statments about Mara not being able to find an arahant...
“Though they seek him everywhere,
Mara and his army do not find him:
The one thus detached, secure,
Who has gone beyond all ’fetters.”

Then Mara the Evil One … disappeared right there.
https://suttacentral.net/sn4.16/en/bodhi
Those who do not accumulate and are wise regarding food, whose object is the Void, the Unconditioned Freedom—their track cannot be traced, like that of birds in the air.
https://suttacentral.net/dhp90-99/en/buddharakkhita#92
:heart:
Mike
User avatar
Lucas Oliveira
Posts: 1271
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2015 10:07 pm

Re: The devas are not capable of seeing him

Post by Lucas Oliveira »

The Devas are still trapped in Existence.

Buddhas and Arahants have transcended existence.

:namaste:
I participate in this forum using Google Translator. http://translate.google.com.br

http://www.acessoaoinsight.net/
User avatar
Polar Bear
Posts: 1310
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 7:39 am
Location: Bear Republic

Re: The devas are not capable of seeing him

Post by Polar Bear »

Also, in the Brahmajāla Sutta we have this:
The Realized One’s body remains, but his attachment to rebirth has been cut off. As long as his body remains he will be seen by gods and humans. But when his body breaks up, after life has ended, gods and humans will see him no more.

When the stalk of a bunch of mangoes is cut, all the mangoes attached to the stalk will follow along. In the same way, the Realized One’s body remains, but his attachment to rebirth has been cut off. As long as his body remains he will be seen by gods and humans. But when his body breaks up, after life has ended, gods and humans will see him no more.”

https://suttacentral.net/dn1/en/sujato
:anjali:
"I don't envision a single thing that, when developed & cultivated, leads to such great benefit as the mind. The mind, when developed & cultivated, leads to great benefit."

"I don't envision a single thing that, when undeveloped & uncultivated, brings about such suffering & stress as the mind. The mind, when undeveloped & uncultivated, brings about suffering & stress."
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 17920
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: The devas are not capable of seeing him

Post by mikenz66 »

Polar Bear wrote: Fri Apr 03, 2020 6:06 am Also, in the Brahmajāla Sutta we have this:
Ah, thanks for that.

:heart:
Mike
User avatar
Crazy cloud
Posts: 767
Joined: Sun May 12, 2013 8:55 am

Re: The devas are not capable of seeing him

Post by Crazy cloud »

one_awakening wrote: Fri Apr 03, 2020 2:00 am Can someone explain what "The devas are not capable of seeing him" means in the following?

In whom exist no inner stirrings,
Having passed beyond being this or that,
Free from fear, blissful and sorrowless,
The devas are not capable of seeing him.
They have ceased to make individual patterns in the flow of vibrations, become the flow ...
If you didn't care
What happened to me
And I didn't care for you

We would zig-zag our way
Through the boredom and pain
Occasionally glancing up through the rain

Wondering which of the
Buggers to blame
And watching for pigs on the wing
- Roger Waters
auto
Posts: 1908
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: The devas are not capable of seeing him

Post by auto »

Ceisiwr wrote: Fri Apr 03, 2020 2:04 am
one_awakening wrote: Fri Apr 03, 2020 2:00 am Can someone explain what "The devas are not capable of seeing him" means in the following?

In whom exist no inner stirrings,
Having passed beyond being this or that,
Free from fear, blissful and sorrowless,
The devas are not capable of seeing him.
Can’t pin down the Buddha or Arahants as the self has ceased.
What do you mean by the self has ceased?
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 9770
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: The devas are not capable of seeing him

Post by Ceisiwr »

auto wrote: Fri Apr 03, 2020 12:14 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Fri Apr 03, 2020 2:04 am
one_awakening wrote: Fri Apr 03, 2020 2:00 am Can someone explain what "The devas are not capable of seeing him" means in the following?

In whom exist no inner stirrings,
Having passed beyond being this or that,
Free from fear, blissful and sorrowless,
The devas are not capable of seeing him.
Can’t pin down the Buddha or Arahants as the self has ceased.
What do you mean by the self has ceased?
There is no more grasping and so no more “I am” or “I am this” and so on. So, a Deva looking to find and pin down the Buddha (or Arahants) won’t find him/them.
Saññāvirattassa na santi ganthā,
Paññāvimuttassa na santi mohā;
Saññañca diṭṭhiñca ye aggahesuṃ,
Te ghaṭṭayantā vicaranti loke”ti.


“For one detached from perception, there exist no ties,
for one by wisdom freed, no delusions are there,
but those who have grasped perceptions and views,
they wander the world stirring up strife."


Māgaṇḍiya Sutta
auto
Posts: 1908
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: The devas are not capable of seeing him

Post by auto »

Ceisiwr wrote: Fri Apr 03, 2020 12:25 pm
auto wrote: Fri Apr 03, 2020 12:14 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Fri Apr 03, 2020 2:04 am

Can’t pin down the Buddha or Arahants as the self has ceased.
What do you mean by the self has ceased?
There is no more grasping and so no more “I am” or “I am this” and so on. So, a Deva looking to find and pin down the Buddha (or Arahants) won’t find him/them.
conceit "I am" is asmimāna, which is ego. Whereas there seem to be many who think it is about cessation of sense of self or self.
https://suttacentral.net/mn22/en/sujato wrote:And how is a mendicant a noble one with banner and burden put down, detached?Kathañca, bhikkhave, bhikkhu ariyo pannaddhajo pannabhāro visaṃyutto hoti?
It’s when a mendicant has given up the conceit ‘I am’, cut it off at the root, made it like a palm stump, obliterated it, so it’s unable to arise in the future.Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhuno asmimāno pahīno hoti, ucchinnamūlo tālāvatthukato anabhāvaṅkato, āyatiṃ anuppādadhammo.
That’s how a mendicant is a noble one with banner and burden put down, detached.Evaṃ kho, bhikkhave, bhikkhu ariyo pannaddhajo pannabhāro visaṃyutto hoti.

When a mendicant’s mind is freed like this, the gods together with Indra, Brahmā, and Pajāpati, search as they may, will not findEvaṃ vimuttacittaṃ kho, bhikkhave, bhikkhuṃ saindā devā sabrahmakā sapajāpatikā anvesaṃ nādhigacchanti:
anything that such a Realized One’s consciousness depends on.‘idaṃ nissitaṃ tathāgatassa viññāṇan’ti.Why is that?Taṃ kissa hetu?
Because even in the present life the Realized One is undiscoverable, I say.Diṭṭhevāhaṃ, bhikkhave, dhamme tathāgataṃ ananuvijjoti vadāmi.
the part where certain ascetics and brahmins misinterpret it as declaration of the annihilation of the 'soul'/self.

Though I speak and explain like this, certain ascetics and brahmins misrepresent me with the false, hollow, lying, untruthful claim:Evaṃvādiṃ kho maṃ, bhikkhave, evamakkhāyiṃ eke samaṇabrāhmaṇā asatā tucchā musā abhūtena abbhācikkhanti:
‘The ascetic Gotama is an exterminator. He advocates the annihilation, eradication, and obliteration of an existing being.’‘venayiko samaṇo gotamo, sato sattassa ucchedaṃ vināsaṃ vibhavaṃ paññāpetī’ti.

but it isn't, buddha isn't annihilator.
I have been falsely misrepresented as being what I am not, and saying what I do not say.Yathā cāhaṃ na, bhikkhave, yathā cāhaṃ na vadāmi, tathā maṃ te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā asatā tucchā musā abhūtena abbhācikkhanti:
In the past, as today, what I describe is suffering and the cessation of suffering.Pubbe cāhaṃ, bhikkhave, etarahi ca dukkhañceva paññāpemi, dukkhassa ca nirodhaṃ.
are you an annihilator of the self, do you annihilate sentient beings? and think they don't have self, so there is just aggregates?
auto
Posts: 1908
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: The devas are not capable of seeing him

Post by auto »

Ceisiwr wrote: Fri Apr 03, 2020 12:25 pm
auto wrote: Fri Apr 03, 2020 12:14 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Fri Apr 03, 2020 2:04 am

Can’t pin down the Buddha or Arahants as the self has ceased.
What do you mean by the self has ceased?
There is no more grasping and so no more “I am” or “I am this” and so on. So, a Deva looking to find and pin down the Buddha (or Arahants) won’t find him/them.
conceit "I am" is asmimāna, which is ego. Whereas there seem to be many who think it is about cessation of sense of self or self.
https://suttacentral.net/mn22/en/sujato wrote:And how is a mendicant a noble one with banner and burden put down, detached?Kathañca, bhikkhave, bhikkhu ariyo pannaddhajo pannabhāro visaṃyutto hoti?
It’s when a mendicant has given up the conceit ‘I am’, cut it off at the root, made it like a palm stump, obliterated it, so it’s unable to arise in the future.Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhuno asmimāno pahīno hoti, ucchinnamūlo tālāvatthukato anabhāvaṅkato, āyatiṃ anuppādadhammo.
That’s how a mendicant is a noble one with banner and burden put down, detached.Evaṃ kho, bhikkhave, bhikkhu ariyo pannaddhajo pannabhāro visaṃyutto hoti.

When a mendicant’s mind is freed like this, the gods together with Indra, Brahmā, and Pajāpati, search as they may, will not findEvaṃ vimuttacittaṃ kho, bhikkhave, bhikkhuṃ saindā devā sabrahmakā sapajāpatikā anvesaṃ nādhigacchanti:
anything that such a Realized One’s consciousness depends on.‘idaṃ nissitaṃ tathāgatassa viññāṇan’ti.Why is that?Taṃ kissa hetu?
Because even in the present life the Realized One is undiscoverable, I say.Diṭṭhevāhaṃ, bhikkhave, dhamme tathāgataṃ ananuvijjoti vadāmi.
the part where certain ascetics and brahmins misinterpret it as declaration of the annihilation of the 'soul'/self.

Though I speak and explain like this, certain ascetics and brahmins misrepresent me with the false, hollow, lying, untruthful claim:Evaṃvādiṃ kho maṃ, bhikkhave, evamakkhāyiṃ eke samaṇabrāhmaṇā asatā tucchā musā abhūtena abbhācikkhanti:
‘The ascetic Gotama is an exterminator. He advocates the annihilation, eradication, and obliteration of an existing being.’‘venayiko samaṇo gotamo, sato sattassa ucchedaṃ vināsaṃ vibhavaṃ paññāpetī’ti.

but it isn't, buddha isn't annihilator.
I have been falsely misrepresented as being what I am not, and saying what I do not say.Yathā cāhaṃ na, bhikkhave, yathā cāhaṃ na vadāmi, tathā maṃ te bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā asatā tucchā musā abhūtena abbhācikkhanti:
In the past, as today, what I describe is suffering and the cessation of suffering.Pubbe cāhaṃ, bhikkhave, etarahi ca dukkhañceva paññāpemi, dukkhassa ca nirodhaṃ.
are you an annihilator of the self, do you annihilate sentient beings? and think they don't have self, so there is just aggregates?
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 9770
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: The devas are not capable of seeing him

Post by Ceisiwr »

Greetings auto,

“I am” is identity, which is to say “I am” is the sense of self which the worldling takes to be real and true. “There is a self because I am”.

Annihilationism is the doctrine of the destruction of an existing being. It starts from the premise of “I am”, which is taken to be real and existing and then is destroyed. The Dhamma isn’t annihilationism as it doesn’t claim a self to start with. The sense and idea of self is viewed as being dependently originated. It’s an empty concept. The cessation of self merely means that “I am” no longer arises due to ignorance based contact. “I am” is no longer constructed, apart from in language for convenient speech.

The concept of “I am” and the self is to be seen through and abandoned with knowledge of the way things are. That’s is to say, the self and “I am” goes to cessation.

Metta

:)
Saññāvirattassa na santi ganthā,
Paññāvimuttassa na santi mohā;
Saññañca diṭṭhiñca ye aggahesuṃ,
Te ghaṭṭayantā vicaranti loke”ti.


“For one detached from perception, there exist no ties,
for one by wisdom freed, no delusions are there,
but those who have grasped perceptions and views,
they wander the world stirring up strife."


Māgaṇḍiya Sutta
auto
Posts: 1908
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: The devas are not capable of seeing him

Post by auto »

Ceisiwr wrote: Fri Apr 03, 2020 1:00 pm Greetings auto,

“I am” is identity, which is to say “I am” is the sense of self which the worldling takes to be real and true. “There is a self because I am”.

Annihilationism is the doctrine of the destruction of an existing being. It starts from the premise of “I am”, which is taken to be real and existing and then is destroyed. The Dhamma isn’t annihilationism as it doesn’t claim a self to start with. The sense and idea of self is viewed as being dependently originated. It’s an empty concept. The cessation of self merely means that “I am” no longer arises due to ignorance based contact. “I am” is no longer constructed, apart from in language for convenient speech.

The concept of “I am” and the self is to be seen through and abandoned with knowledge of the way things are. That’s is to say, the self and “I am” goes to cessation.

Metta

:)
yo,
Sense of self isn't conceit. Māna= conceit. When you know that you are human being, the 'I know' is paññā, knowledge. When you ask from anyone about their self, whatever answer they give is knowledge: I am worker, I am teacher.
Losing the 'I' isn't going to change the fact you are human being, more so human beings are classed by the things they do, so the cessation of the self doesn't look reasonable, why would you do it or want?

The conceit is about I am brahman by birth, I will be brahman next world again. These people doesn't think in terms of conditions or kamma, doesn't care about how they act, If you don't act appropriately then your brahman status is subject to cease.

The 'I am' is conventional for people who doesn't know about next world or kamma, if they do then the conventional sense of self is the ultimate(here and now).
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 9770
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: The devas are not capable of seeing him

Post by Ceisiwr »

auto wrote: Fri Apr 03, 2020 3:17 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Fri Apr 03, 2020 1:00 pm Greetings auto,

“I am” is identity, which is to say “I am” is the sense of self which the worldling takes to be real and true. “There is a self because I am”.

Annihilationism is the doctrine of the destruction of an existing being. It starts from the premise of “I am”, which is taken to be real and existing and then is destroyed. The Dhamma isn’t annihilationism as it doesn’t claim a self to start with. The sense and idea of self is viewed as being dependently originated. It’s an empty concept. The cessation of self merely means that “I am” no longer arises due to ignorance based contact. “I am” is no longer constructed, apart from in language for convenient speech.

The concept of “I am” and the self is to be seen through and abandoned with knowledge of the way things are. That’s is to say, the self and “I am” goes to cessation.

Metta

:)
yo,
Sense of self isn't conceit. Māna= conceit. When you know that you are human being, the 'I know' is paññā, knowledge. When you ask from anyone about their self, whatever answer they give is knowledge: I am worker, I am teacher.
Losing the 'I' isn't going to change the fact you are human being, more so human beings are classed by the things they do, so the cessation of the self doesn't look reasonable, why would you do it or want?

The conceit is about I am brahman by birth, I will be brahman next world again. These people doesn't think in terms of conditions or kamma, doesn't care about how they act, If you don't act appropriately then your brahman status is subject to cease.

The 'I am' is conventional for people who doesn't know about next world or kamma, if they do then the conventional sense of self is the ultimate(here and now).

Strange to think that someone can have a sense of self without “I am”.

A human being is a concept. Birth is a concept. Death is a concept. Concepts are to be seen through and let go of.

Metta

:)
Saññāvirattassa na santi ganthā,
Paññāvimuttassa na santi mohā;
Saññañca diṭṭhiñca ye aggahesuṃ,
Te ghaṭṭayantā vicaranti loke”ti.


“For one detached from perception, there exist no ties,
for one by wisdom freed, no delusions are there,
but those who have grasped perceptions and views,
they wander the world stirring up strife."


Māgaṇḍiya Sutta
Post Reply