Let's discuss what exactly is "name and form" in DO

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 8980
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Let's discuss what exactly is "name and form" in DO

Post by DooDoot »

coconut wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 9:54 pm :quote: false translation :quote: - oh and let me guess like you said last time :quote: fake sutta :quote: too right?

Perhaps you can translate your own suttas and invent your own dhamma too. :shrug:
Sorry but you lost the debate because you could not make a scholarly or substantiated reply.

Sujato translates upagā as reborn & attabhāvapaṭilābho as reincarnation. Thanissaro translates opapātikā as reborn and para as "next". Obviously, the Buddha did not use dozens of words to mean "reborn" or "reincarnated". "Para" does not mean "next" but it means "other".
Last edited by DooDoot on Wed Oct 28, 2020 9:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
coconut
Posts: 394
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2020 8:10 am

Re: Let's discuss what exactly is "name and form" in DO

Post by coconut »

DooDoot wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 9:56 pm
coconut wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 9:54 pm :quote: false translation :quote: - oh and let me guess like you said last time :quote: fake sutta :quote: too right?

Perhaps you can translate your own suttas and invent your own dhamma too. :shrug:
Sorry but you lost the debate.

Sujato translates upagā as reborn & attabhāvapaṭilābho as reincarnation. Thanissaro translates opapātikā as reborn and para as "next". Obviously, the Buddha did not use dozens of words to mean "reborn" or "reincarnated".
Cool, let me know when you set up your own website with your own translations.
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 8980
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Let's discuss what exactly is "name and form" in DO

Post by DooDoot »

coconut wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 9:57 pm Cool, let me know when you set up your own website with your own translations.
You lost the debate.
‘Does this act with the body that I want to do lead to hurting myself, hurting others, or hurting both?

‘yannu kho ahaṃ idaṃ kāyena kammaṃ kattukāmo idaṃ me kāyakammaṃ attabyābādhāyapi saṃvatteyya, parabyābādhāyapi saṃvatteyya, ubhayabyābādhāyapi saṃvatteyya
The word "para" does not mean "next". "Paro loka" means "other world", per the majority of translators:
And what, bhikkhus, is wrong view? ‘There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed; no fruit or result of good and bad actions; no this world, no other world; no mother, no father; no beings who are reborn spontaneously; no good and virtuous recluses and brahmins in the world who have realised for themselves by direct knowledge and declare this world and the other world.’ This is wrong view.

https://suttacentral.net/mn117/en/bodhi
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
coconut
Posts: 394
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2020 8:10 am

Re: Let's discuss what exactly is "name and form" in DO

Post by coconut »

DooDoot wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 10:00 pm
coconut wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 9:57 pm Cool, let me know when you set up your own website with your own translations.
You lost the debate.
‘Does this act with the body that I want to do lead to hurting myself, hurting others, or hurting both?

‘yannu kho ahaṃ idaṃ kāyena kammaṃ kattukāmo idaṃ me kāyakammaṃ attabyābādhāyapi saṃvatteyya, parabyābādhāyapi saṃvatteyya, ubhayabyābādhāyapi saṃvatteyya
The word "para" does not mean "next". "Paro loka" means "other world", per the majority of translators:
And what, bhikkhus, is wrong view? ‘There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed; no fruit or result of good and bad actions; no this world, no other world; no mother, no father; no beings who are reborn spontaneously; no good and virtuous recluses and brahmins in the world who have realised for themselves by direct knowledge and declare this world and the other world.’ This is wrong view.

https://suttacentral.net/mn117/en/bodhi
You do realize the translation you quoted says "no beings who are reborn spontaneously", and that Bhikkhu Bodhi also believes in Rebirth and his translations also refer to rebirth as well right?
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 8980
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Let's discuss what exactly is "name and form" in DO

Post by DooDoot »

coconut wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 10:04 pm You do realize the translation you quoted says "no beings who are reborn spontaneously", and that Bhikkhu Bodhi also believes in Rebirth and his translations also refer to rebirth as well right?
Yes. VBB is wrong here. I said the majority of translators translate "para" to mean "other".

I already provided you with an unambiguous context but you ignored it.
Last edited by DooDoot on Wed Oct 28, 2020 10:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
coconut
Posts: 394
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2020 8:10 am

Re: Let's discuss what exactly is "name and form" in DO

Post by coconut »

DooDoot wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 10:05 pm
coconut wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 10:04 pm You do realize the translation you quoted says "no beings who are reborn spontaneously", and that Bhikkhu Bodhi also believes in Rebirth and his translations also refer to rebirth as well right?
Yes. VBB is wrong here.
You mention the majority of translators, but the majority of translators believe in rebirth and refer to rebirth. You do not seem to be in the majority.

edit: just saw your edit and I don't see what "other" has to do with anything, no need to strawman.
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 8980
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Let's discuss what exactly is "name and form" in DO

Post by DooDoot »

coconut wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 10:07 pm You mention the majority of translators, but the majority of translators believe in rebirth and refer to rebirth. You do not seem to be in the majority.
You appear riddled with wrong views of self-views and identitarianism.

I already provided you with an unambiguous context but you ignored it.

Para means "other".

Again:
“Well, is suffering made by both oneself and another?”
‘Kiṃ nu kho, bho gotama, sayaṅkatañca paraṅkatañca dukkhan’ti?
Bhikkhu Bodhi does not need to be a rocket scientist to comprehend this.

But you want to argue the above text means:
“Well, is suffering made by both oneself and an next?”
‘Kiṃ nu kho, bho gotama, sayaṅkatañca paraṅkatañca dukkhan’ti?

:rofl:
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
coconut
Posts: 394
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2020 8:10 am

Re: Let's discuss what exactly is "name and form" in DO

Post by coconut »

DooDoot wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 10:09 pm
coconut wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 10:07 pm You mention the majority of translators, but the majority of translators believe in rebirth and refer to rebirth. You do not seem to be in the majority.
You appear riddled with wrong views of self-views and identitarianism.

I already provided you with an unambiguous context but you ignored it.

Para means "other".

Again:
“Well, is suffering made by both oneself and another?”
‘Kiṃ nu kho, bho gotama, sayaṅkatañca paraṅkatañca dukkhan’ti?
Bhikkhu Bodhi does not need to be a rocket scientist to comprehend this.
Your "Other" or "Next" translation argument is irrelevant to the wrong view you hold of no-rebirth aka annihilation, which the majority of Buddhists or translators do not hold.

Like I said, let me know when you've retranslated the four nikayas into your Atheist translation and I'll read it.
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 8980
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Let's discuss what exactly is "name and form" in DO

Post by DooDoot »

coconut wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 10:11 pm Your "Other" or "Next" translation argument is irrelevant to the wrong view you hold of no-rebirth aka annihilation, which the majority of Buddhists or translators do not hold.
Again, the above is wrong views. Annihilationism does not mean no-rebirth. :thinking: You are posting village or children's Buddhism. I must start work now. You are welcome to ask me questions on the Beginners Forum.

:anjali:
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
coconut
Posts: 394
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2020 8:10 am

Re: Let's discuss what exactly is "name and form" in DO

Post by coconut »

DooDoot wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 10:14 pm
coconut wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 10:11 pm Your "Other" or "Next" translation argument is irrelevant to the wrong view you hold of no-rebirth aka annihilation, which the majority of Buddhists or translators do not hold.
Again, the above is wrong views. Annihilationism does not mean no-rebirth. :thinking: You are posting village or children's Buddhism. I must start work now. You are welcome to ask me questions on the Beginners Forum.

:anjali:
"Herein, bhikkhus, a certain recluse or a brahmin asserts the following doctrine and view: 'The self, good sir, has material form; it is composed of the four primary elements and originates from father and mother. Since this self, good sir, is annihilated and destroyed with the breakup of the body and does not exist after death, at this point the self is completely annihilated.' In this way some proclaim the annihilation, destruction, and extermination of an existent being.
- DN 1

Yawn...

Wake me up when you've retranslated the suttas, so I can stop reading these :quote: false translations :quote: and :quote: fake suttas :quote:
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 9850
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Let's discuss what exactly is "name and form" in DO

Post by Ceisiwr »

:focus:
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
form
Posts: 1771
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2016 3:23 am

Re: Let's discuss what exactly is "name and form" in DO

Post by form »

How does conscious leads to name and form? If it is defined and mind and body, then It is a force that support the biological and psychological functionings? If interpretative as labelling then this won't make sense.
User avatar
Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta
Posts: 1281
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 5:06 pm

Re: Let's discuss what exactly is "name and form" in DO

Post by Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta »

.



The possibility that Nama-Rupa being:
  • Subject & Object
  • Knower & Known

  • Ven. Sucitto Bhikkhu
    • To the extent which (paccaya) the mind has not comprehended (avijja) Truth, habitual drives (sankhara) manifest and condition (paccaya) awareness into a discriminative mode (vinnana) that operates in terms of (paccaya) subject and object (nama-rupa) held (paccaya) to exist on either side of the six sense-doors (salayatana).
      Ven. Sucitto Bhikkhu - Amaravati (from introduction to the book: The way it is by Ajahn Sumedho)
      I'm quite sure Ven. Sumedho wouldn't reject this approach on nama-rupa, as he let this appear in the introduction to his book.

  • Mahasi Sayadaw
    • The Knower and the Known
      ...
      In this way nama, the knower, can be distinguished from rupa, the known. This can be effected without any preconception. One recognizes the phenomena without giving any thought to them. In other words, recognition is spontaneous.

      Discourse on To Nibbana via the Noble Eightfold Path

      https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/aut ... el298.html
    • If, therefore, at this initial stage, when action-results have not yet gathered momentum, you will be able to take note of the object just as you see it, or in other words, just as your eye-cognition occurs. You will then experience the abstract reality of both the subject that sees as well as the object that is seen. The subject is, of course, //nama// and the object //rupa//.

      A Discourse on MALUKYAPUTTA SUTTA
      Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw

  • Goenkaji
    • ... the process arises because of consciousness, the act of cognition which separates the world into the knower and the known, subject and object, ...
      The art of living by Goenkaji


:heart:
.


🅢🅐🅑🅑🅔 🅓🅗🅐🅜🅜🅐 🅐🅝🅐🅣🅣🅐

Self ...
  • "an entirely and perfectly foolish idea" :D ~ MN22
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 9850
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Let's discuss what exactly is "name and form" in DO

Post by Ceisiwr »

Ceisiwr wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:52 pm If we look at DN15:
“It was said: ‘With mentality-materiality as condition there is contact.’ How that is so, Ānanda, should be understood in this way: If those qualities, traits, signs, and indicators through which there is a description of the mental body were all absent, would designation-contact be discerned in the material body?”

“Certainly not, venerable sir.”

“If those qualities, traits, signs, and indicators through which there is a description of the material body were all absent, would impingement-contact be discerned in the mental body?”

“Certainly not, venerable sir.”

“If those qualities, traits, signs, and indicators through which there is a description of the mental body and the material body were all absent, would either designation-contact or impingement-contact be discerned?”

“Certainly not, venerable sir.”

“If those qualities, traits, signs, and indicators through which there is a description of mentality-materiality were all absent, would contact be discerned?”

“Certainly not, venerable sir.”

“Therefore, Ānanda, this is the cause, source, origin, and condition for contact, namely, mentality-materiality.
https://suttacentral.net/dn15/en/bodhi

It is saying that Nāma = vedana, sanna etc whilst rūpa = the 6 sense bases, since it makes sense to say of the sense bases there is "resistance/impingement contact" but little sense to say that a sense object is impingement/resistance contact. From this it means mind and body.
Thinking about this some more, perhaps it does make more sense if rupa here = visible forms etc.
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
DooDoot
Posts: 8980
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Let's discuss what exactly is "name and form" in DO

Post by DooDoot »

coconut wrote: Wed Oct 28, 2020 10:16 pm - DN 1

Yawn...

Wake me up
It appears very difficult to wake up one that underlines the wrong words. :zzz:
"Herein, bhikkhus, a certain recluse or a brahmin asserts the following doctrine and view: 'The self, good sir, has material form; it is composed of the four primary elements and originates from father and mother. Since this self, good sir, is annihilated and destroyed with the breakup of the body and does not exist after death, at this point the self is completely annihilated.' In this way some proclaim the annihilation, destruction, and extermination of an existent being.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
Post Reply