DN 2 conclusively details: What is rūpa (form), and a-rūpa in four jhānas context?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
pitithefool
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 5:39 am

Re: DN 2 conclusively details: What is rūpa (form), and a-rūpa in four jhānas context?

Post by pitithefool »

frank k wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 3:56 pm
pitithefool wrote: Mon Apr 19, 2021 8:18 pm ...
In this case, It would still be the external sense objects, not necessarily just 4 elements. Remember, in the salayatana definitions, rupa actually means "shape" or "form" or "visual object", sepcifically in terms of the eye. We still have mental objects etc. It's also important to point out that birth doesn't happen until after becoming, clinging, craving, and feeling, which all come after nama-rupa. Nama rupa just means subject-object.
...
At least for the OP, DN 2 passages, it is definitely the 4 elements of the meditator's anatomical body. That's why they specifically said "the rupa born of mother and father and porridge".
It does indeed mean that in this sutta, in that section.

The next section also states that the mind-made body is also possessed of form:
"With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability, he directs and inclines it to creating a mind-made body. From this body he creates another body, endowed with form, made of the mind, complete in all its parts, not inferior in its faculties. Just as if a man were to draw a reed from its sheath. The thought would occur to him: 'This is the sheath, this is the reed. The sheath is one thing, the reed another, but the reed has been drawn out from the sheath.' Or as if a man were to draw a sword from its scabbard. The thought would occur to him: 'This is the sword, this is the scabbard. The sword is one thing, the scabbard another, but the sword has been drawn out from the scabbard.' Or as if a man were to pull a snake out from its slough. The thought would occur to him: 'This is the snake, this is the slough. The snake is one thing, the slough another, but the snake has been pulled out from the slough.' In the same way — with his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability, the monk directs and inclines it to creating a mind-made body. From this body he creates another body, endowed with form, made of the mind, complete in all its parts, not inferior in its faculties.
Please note: This profile picture is not actually a picture of the user.
User avatar
frank k
Posts: 2247
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:55 pm
Contact:

Re: DN 2 conclusively details: What is rūpa (form), and a-rūpa in four jhānas context?

Post by frank k »

Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 4:06 pm ...
That isn’t what it says at all. It says this kayo is born of mother and father, not this rupa. It makes a distinction between the two.
DN 2 4 elements section from OP: kaya, rupa, 4 elements all equated
‘ayaṃ kho me kāyo rūpī
‘This body of mine is physical.
cātu-mahā-bhūtiko
It’s made up of the four primary elements,
mātā-pettika-sambhavo
produced by mother and father,

In my blog article, I have highlight kaya, rupa, in bright yellow marker!

What more can I do?

I took the time to do audits very carefully, it really sucks I'm wasting my time explaining something you should have read the first time, or second time.

When I question someone's article, I look at it a few times, especially the relevant portions to make sure I get my facts straight.
That's a hint that you should do the same.
www.lucid24.org/sted : ☸Lucid24.org🐘 STED definitions
www.audtip.org/audtip: 🎙️🔊Audio Tales in Pāli: ☸Dharma and Vinaya in many languages
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22402
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: DN 2 conclusively details: What is rūpa (form), and a-rūpa in four jhānas context?

Post by Ceisiwr »

frank k wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 4:30 pm
DN 2 4 elements section from OP: kaya, rupa, 4 elements all equated
‘ayaṃ kho me kāyo rūpī
‘This body of mine is physical.
cātu-mahā-bhūtiko
It’s made up of the four primary elements,
mātā-pettika-sambhavo
produced by mother and father,

In my blog article, I have highlight kaya, rupa, in bright yellow marker!
Seeing as how kayo is nominative and rupi is adjectival I’m confused as to how you can equate them? The predicate is not the same as the subject.
What more can I do?
Actually learn Pali rather than rely upon translators.
I took the time to do audits very carefully, it really sucks I'm wasting my time explaining something you should have read the first time, or second time.
So far it’s sloppy, as with all of your “audits” that I’ve read so far.
When I question someone's article, I look at it a few times, especially the relevant portions to make sure I get my facts straight.
That's a hint that you should do the same.
Perhaps you should follow your own advice here.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: DN 2 conclusively details: What is rūpa (form), and a-rūpa in four jhānas context?

Post by Coëmgenu »

Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 4:48 pmSeeing as how kayo is nominative and rupi is adjectival I’m confused as to how you can equate them? The predicate is not the same as the subject.
This point here is a bit confusing. Using "apparition" meaning "that which appears," which I understand to be your preferred reading for "rūpa," if we render rūpa as adjectival and kāya as nominal, we get "this apparitional assemblage," with kāya being read in the sense of something aggregated or assembled of bits. How do the adjective and the noun not correspond mutually?
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22402
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: DN 2 conclusively details: What is rūpa (form), and a-rūpa in four jhānas context?

Post by Ceisiwr »

Coëmgenu wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 5:09 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 4:48 pmSeeing as how kayo is nominative and rupi is adjectival I’m confused as to how you can equate them? The predicate is not the same as the subject.
This point here is a bit confusing. Using "apparition" meaning "that which appears," which I understand to be your preferred reading for "rūpa," if we render rūpa as adjectival and kāya as nominal, we get "this apparitional assemblage," with kāya being read in the sense of something aggregated or assembled of bits. How do the adjective and the noun not correspond mutually?
I think “form” might be more appropriate here. Correspondence isn’t equivalence.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: DN 2 conclusively details: What is rūpa (form), and a-rūpa in four jhānas context?

Post by Coëmgenu »

Then we get "the formal assemblage" with an irregular usage of "formal." The same question still applies.

Also, by saying "correspondence is not equivalence," are you saying that rūpa might correspond with an appearance but might not itself be equivalent to said appearance?
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22402
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: DN 2 conclusively details: What is rūpa (form), and a-rūpa in four jhānas context?

Post by Ceisiwr »

Coëmgenu wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 6:04 pm Then we get "the formal assemblage" with an irregular usage of "formal." The same question still applies.
Sorry what question? You asked about correspondence. Are you asking how it makes sense, or what the best translation would be?
Also, by saying "correspondence is not equivalence," are you saying that rūpa might correspond with an appearance but might not itself be equivalent to said appearance?
I’m saying that to say John is fat isn’t to say John is the same thing as “fat”. The same with our case here.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: DN 2 conclusively details: What is rūpa (form), and a-rūpa in four jhānas context?

Post by Coëmgenu »

Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 6:21 pmSorry what question?
You asked this question, "Seeing as how kayo is nominative and rupi is adjectival I’m confused as to how you can equate them?" I asked you, "How do the adjective and the noun not correspond mutually?" It's not like they are both nouns and one is accusative and one is nominative.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22402
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: DN 2 conclusively details: What is rūpa (form), and a-rūpa in four jhānas context?

Post by Ceisiwr »

Coëmgenu wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 6:24 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 6:21 pmSorry what question?
You asked this question, "Seeing as how kayo is nominative and rupi is adjectival I’m confused as to how you can equate them?" I asked you, "How do the adjective and the noun not correspond mutually?" It's not like they are both nouns and one is accusative and one is nominative.
The question was rhetorical. I thought it quite clear it would be absurd to equate a description with the subject. That being said I rather idiotically made a distinction between correspondence and equivalence. Rupa does not equal the body, just like how John is not the exact same thing as adipose tissue.

“John is beautiful”

Would you say that John and “beautiful” are exactly the same thing? I would say it’s an attribute or quality of John, the subject.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
ToVincent
Posts: 1839
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm

Re: DN 2 conclusively details: What is rūpa (form), and a-rūpa in four jhānas context?

Post by ToVincent »

I have also a question about the use of mine ["This body of mine is physical"] - if mine cannot be mine, nor I.

Also "four" might not be four [composed of the four primary elements: water, earth, fire and air], if we consider the weight of each element.
Four kilos of air - four kilos of fire — that's pretty illogical. How can we attribute them an equivalence with four kilos of earth.

Therefore, I say no to the above , and I am saying it in the negative sense; of course.
But if one (let's say a cool cat) puts himself on the level of quantum physics, one might assume that he might consider what I just say as positive.
(Note: maybe he is just a metaphysical "hot cat" running on synthetic a priori - who knows? - Has anyone experienced a "hot cat" running on synthetic a priori? - you see, that's the proof! ).

I hope this makes things a bit clearer.
.
.
In this world, there are many people acting and yearning for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; and very few for the Unborn.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22402
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: DN 2 conclusively details: What is rūpa (form), and a-rūpa in four jhānas context?

Post by Ceisiwr »

ayaṃ kho me kāyo rūpī

ayaṃ =This

me = mine

kāyo = body (that with parts)

rūpī = ?

Pāli

Rūpin (adj.) [fr. rūpa] 1. having material qualities, possessed of form or shape or body or matter, belonging to the realm of form. rūpī is nearly always combd contrasted with ;arūpī formless, incorporeal (see rūpa D 2 a), cp. combn rūpī arūpī saññī asaññī nevasaññinâsaññī Nd2 617 and similarly It 87=Miln 217. -- D i.34 (attā dibbo rūpī), 77 (kāyo r. manomayo), 186 (attā etc.), 195 (attapaṭilābho r. manomayo); iii.111 139; M ii.229; S iii.46 (r. arūpī saññī etc.); iv.202, 402 A ii.34; Nd1 97, 137; Ps ii.38 (rūpī rūpāni passati) Dhs 635, 1091, 1444; Vbh 123, 342 (read rūpī); Nett 28 (pañc' indriyāni rūpīni), 69 (five rūpīni indriyāni & five arūpīni); DA i.119 (attā); DhsA 304 (rūpino dhammā) VbhA 511 sq. (attā).

Sanskrit

रूपिन् [ rūpin ] [ rūpin ] m. f. n.
- having or assuming a partic. form or figure , embodied , corporeal Lit. MBh. Lit. Kāv.
- having a beautiful form or figure , well-shaped , handsome , beautiful Lit. ŚBr.
- (ifc.) having the form or nature or character of , characterised by , appearing as Lit. MBh. Lit. Kāv.

ayaṃ kho me kāyo rūpī

This mine body having form

This body of mine, having form.

Form of course being different to "matter", closer in meaning to "image".

Pāli

Rūpa
- form
- figure
- appearance
- principle of form

Sanskrit

रूप [ rūpa ]
- any outward appearance or phenomenon or colour
- form
- shape
- figure
- dreamy or phantom shapes

From the thematic verb रूप् (rūp):

√ रूप् [ rūp ]
- to form
- figure
- represent
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: DN 2 conclusively details: What is rūpa (form), and a-rūpa in four jhānas context?

Post by Coëmgenu »

Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 6:40 pm
Coëmgenu wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 6:24 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 6:21 pmSorry what question?
You asked this question, "Seeing as how kayo is nominative and rupi is adjectival I’m confused as to how you can equate them?" I asked you, "How do the adjective and the noun not correspond mutually?" It's not like they are both nouns and one is accusative and one is nominative.
The question was rhetorical. I thought it quite clear it would be absurd to equate a description with the subject.
At the same time, what is a description if not of a subject? What do adjectives correspond to if not nouns and such? If you describe John as wise, it doesn't meant that wise is the only thing John is, but it certainly means that John is wise. When you describe kāya using the adjectival form of rūpa, the same still stands.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: DN 2 conclusively details: What is rūpa (form), and a-rūpa in four jhānas context?

Post by DooDoot »

Coëmgenu wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 6:24 pm one is accusative and one is nominative.
The physical body contains a nervous system. When the physical body is calmed & purified via anapanasati, the nervous system starts to bliss out, which is the bliss later experienced in jhana. There comes a time when the bliss reaches its peak when the breath is so calm it & the physical body can no longer be discerned. Therefore, although the physical body is completely blissed, the physical body can longer be felt, apart from in the brain. Thus consciousness converges on the bliss in the brain and it becomes one-pointed there, where the nimitta also forms to replace the breathing as the meditation object. This is the culmination of the 1st jhana and this is why these jhanas are called "rupa jhana". Their bliss & feelings are generated in/dependent upon the physical body's nervous system.

It is unrelated to what FrankK is posting about "rupa".

To repeat, although the bliss in generated in the physical body, the physical body cannot be felt. The 1st jhana is experienced as a "disembodied" experience, despite it depending upon the physical body.
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
ToVincent
Posts: 1839
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm

Re: DN 2 conclusively details: What is rūpa (form), and a-rūpa in four jhānas context?

Post by ToVincent »

FIRST
If rūpī is adjectival, then frankk is right, as far as Pali (grammar) is concerned - I see no reason to slander him on that ground - (or on any other grounds, by the way).
That's petty.

SECOND
Slandering someone on Pali, and giving him a counter-explanation on the mere ground of some niggling logic, is nonsense and contemptible.

THIRD
MBh. & Kāv. are post-Buddhist - which shows how someone is defective and pretentious, when it comes to his pseudo-knowledge about pre-Buddhist literature, and Veda in general.
If one wants to add a post-Buddhist reference to an already existing pre-Buddhist reference, that's fine - (It will show a great probability that the meaning spanned Buddha's era).
But one, two, or more post-Buddhist references, without a pre-Buddhist reference is nonsense.

FOURTH
The Pali definition states clearly that rūpī (rūpin) — besides the meaning of "form or shape", can also mean "having material qualities, possessed of ... body or matter).

As far as everything "rūpa" is concerned in the Monier-Williams dictionary, it has already been quoted in another thread:
It is a ridiculous, poor and pretentious erudition, than to take the mere definition of the Monier-Williams dictionary for granted — without searching the Pre-Buddhist literature as well — and try to make it an undubitable surety, in the fleeceable minds.

The meaning of rūpa is far more extended than a mere "image/appearance", within the pre-Buddhist literature - provided that one has read it, and therefore questioned the validity of the said dictionary's limited definitions.

Poor erudition is often a good means to impel one's own belief or what Quine calls "ontological relativity" - trying to dodge as much as possible the evident facts.
It still applies.

Again:
As seen on this sketch
https://justpaste.it/img/8b5aab8360db19 ... 2d3961.png
Rūpa takes on the three meanings of the suttas. Namely:
- mahābhūtāna rūpa (fire, water, earth, air).
- upādāya rūpa (The "forms derived" from them [e.g. a tree]).
- bāhirāni āyatanāni rūpa (the "sight" [e.g. of a tree]).

Like a tree, one's body is just an upādāya rūpa. And a bāhirāni āyatanāni rūpa (sight/~image) for someone looking at oneself.
There is no reason to categorically consider an upādāya rūpa as a mere appearance.
However a bāhirāni āyatanāni rūpa, surely is.

______

Petty nonsensical niggling, won't get someone out of the facts.
.
.
In this world, there are many people acting and yearning for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; and very few for the Unborn.
User avatar
frank k
Posts: 2247
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:55 pm
Contact:

Re: DN 2 conclusively details: What is rūpa (form), and a-rūpa in four jhānas context?

Post by frank k »

Ceisiwr wrote: Mon Apr 19, 2021 4:46 pm
You're very close to joining the few elite members of my 'blocked' list.
That’s up to you. No need to announce it really.
There is good reason to let the other forum participants know that half baked logic, eel wriggling, sophistry, equivocation should not be tolerated, to encourage a culture of actually discussing in good faith.
If you were sincere, you would explain in detail how you interpret those passages in the OP, and how you arrived at the conclusion rupa and kaya could not be referring to the meditator's anatomical body.
But since you've committed the same offense so many times on so many discussions,
Welcome to the blocked list, time waster.
www.lucid24.org/sted : ☸Lucid24.org🐘 STED definitions
www.audtip.org/audtip: 🎙️🔊Audio Tales in Pāli: ☸Dharma and Vinaya in many languages
Post Reply