Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Post Reply
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings atipattoh,

Apologies for having missed this post yesterday....
atipattoh wrote: Sat Jun 12, 2021 7:47 am Greetings Paul,
retrofuturist wrote: Sat Jun 12, 2021 6:26 am Very much so, hence their usage, and my comment to Sarath above that the rūpa of nama-rupa is always rupasañña (phenomena) and not materiality (nounemena)
Can you give an example that you clarified as
1. rupasañña (phenomena)

2. materiality description that is noumena in abhidhamma?
Thanks!
1. Your screen you're looking at now is a useful example. Consider how you come to experience it, dependent upon and inextricably embedded within the factors of nama. Recognise that what you experience is perception of form (rupasañña) rather than any noumenic quality of the screen's materiality.

2. That's a question best put to Abhidhammikas, but per my understanding of their doctrine, there are 4 paramattha (ultimate) dhammas. One of those is Rupa, and it relates to noumena.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by DooDoot »

retrofuturist wrote: Sat Jun 12, 2021 10:59 pm 1. Your screen you're looking at now is a useful example. Consider how you come to experience it, dependent upon and inextricably embedded within the factors of nama. Recognise that what you experience is perception of form (rupasañña) rather than any noumenic quality of the screen's materiality.
More or less, we (i.e., the Arahants, puthujjana and in-between) can all come to agreement about the salient perceptual aspects of the computer screen, namely, the white, blue, purple & orange colors, the shape, the size, etc. In other words, this appears unrelated to dependent origination arising from ignorance.

:coffee: :computerproblem:
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
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings DooDoot,

Sure, but what you perceive is a perception, not something other than that.

As Ven. N.Nanamoli explains "What a puthujjana has to realize is that regardless of what he perceives, it is always his perception that is perceived. Whether it is ‘earth’, ‘water’, ‘fire’, ‘air’ or any other thing that MN 1 mentions, all one will ever perceive (puthujjana and arahant alike) is one’s own perception of that ‘matter’"

The concept of "suddhaṃ saṅkhārasantatiṃ" was introduced in the opening post, so as to account for the fabrications of the arahant, who are never ignorant to the reality that what they perceive is a perception.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by DooDoot »

retrofuturist wrote: Sat Jun 12, 2021 11:20 pm As Ven. N.Nanamoli explains "What a puthujjana has to realize is that regardless of what he perceives, it is always his perception that is perceived. Whether it is ‘earth’, ‘water’, ‘fire’, ‘air’ or any other thing that MN 1 mentions, all one will ever perceive (puthujjana and arahant alike) is one’s own perception of that ‘matter’"
Appears unrelated to Dhamma.
I teaching suffering & its cessation - Lord Buddha
:alien:
retrofuturist wrote: Sat Jun 12, 2021 11:20 pm As Ven. N.Nanamoli explains "What a puthujjana has to realize is that regardless of what he perceives, it is always his perception that is perceived. Whether it is ‘earth’, ‘water’, ‘fire’, ‘air’ or any other thing that MN 1 mentions, all one will ever perceive (puthujjana and arahant alike) is one’s own perception of that ‘matter’"
Perception cannot burn the body or make the body obese & sick. A lot more going on than mere solipsist perception. :roll:
Last edited by DooDoot on Sat Jun 12, 2021 11:41 pm, edited 2 times 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
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
DooDoot wrote: Sat Jun 12, 2021 11:38 pm
retrofuturist wrote: Sat Jun 12, 2021 11:20 pm As Ven. N.Nanamoli explains "What a puthujjana has to realize is that regardless of what he perceives, it is always his perception that is perceived. Whether it is ‘earth’, ‘water’, ‘fire’, ‘air’ or any other thing that MN 1 mentions, all one will ever perceive (puthujjana and arahant alike) is one’s own perception of that ‘matter’"
Appears unrelated to Dhamma.
If that were so MN1 would not exist, nor would its classifications about how puthujjanas and arahants do and do not comprehend things, plus how sekhas should discern things so as to comprehend them.

:focus:

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by DooDoot »

retrofuturist wrote: Sat Jun 12, 2021 11:47 pm If that were so MN1 would not exist, nor would its classifications about how puthujjanas and arahants do and do not comprehend things, plus how sekhas should discern things so as to comprehend them.
MN 1 is solely about misconstruing ("mannati") form as 'self'. It is not about "perception" ("sanna").
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
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings DooDoot,

It would appear then that you've misconstrued the Sutta, as the Pali for MN1 most certainly makes repeated reference to perception (e.g. saññatvā and sañjānāti)

:focus:

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by Pulsar »

DooDoot wrote
retrofuturist wrote: ↑Sat Jun 12, 2021 2:03 am
Common Abhidhamma Argument #3 - Dhammas exist, independent of observation

Sutta Reponse: This may be true of noumena such as mahabhuta, which are not phenomena (dhammas) but as it applies to dhammas, it is refuted by the Suttas, which state...
SN 47.42 wrote:
With the arising of attentiveness there is the arising of dhammas. With the cessation of attentiveness there is the cessation of dhammas
DooDoot's response
It seems an examination of the suttas might find the word "dhammas" in SN 47.42 refers to Dhamma Principles.
DooDoot replied to Pulsar
it was already posted twice.
you used SN 45.62 and SN 46.51 to disprove the 4th establishment of mindfulness stated in SN 47.42. You insist
"dhammas" in SN 47.42 refers to Dhamma Principles.
Are you attempting to rewrite the canon?
SN 45.62 and SN 46.51 are not referring to the 4th establishment of mindfulness.
Now I see your game, you use suttas randomly to obfuscate the issue at hand, which makes folks
think you are an expert in suttas. The content of a sutta has to be used in the context given.
You wear me out. Stick to the topic. The topic was the 4 establishments of mindfulness as given in SN 47.42.
You are insisting dhammas in SN 47.42 refer to Dhamma Principals. You are plainly wrong.
Be well! :candle:
asahi
Posts: 2732
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2020 4:23 pm

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by asahi »

:oops:
Last edited by asahi on Sun Jun 13, 2021 4:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
No bashing No gossiping
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5613
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by robertk »

robertk wrote: Sat Jun 12, 2021 7:59 am
Common Abhidhamma Argument #1 - Mentality and materiality are paramattha dhammas (i.e. ultimate dhammas)

Sutta Reponse: Never in the Suttas are materiality referred to as "dhammas".
Satipatthana sutta Majjhima Nikaya sutta 10
Dhammānupassanā khandhapabbaṃ


3. The Six Bases)
40. "Again, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu abides contemplating mindobjects
as mind-objects in terms of the six internal and external
bases.160 And how does a bhikkhu abide contemplatingmind-objects as mind-objects in terms of the six internal and
external bases? Here a bhikkhu understands the eye, he understands
forms, and he understands the fetter that arises dependent
on both; and he also understands how there comes to be
the arising of the unarisen fetter, and how there comes to be the
abandoning of the arisen fetter, and how there comes to be the
future non-arising of the abandoned fetter.
"He understands the ear, he understands sounds...He understands
the nose, he understands odours...He understands the
tongue, he understands flavours...He understands the body, he
understands tangibles..
.He understands the mind, he understands
mind-objects, and he understands the fetter that arises
dependent on both; and he also understands how there comes to
be the arising of the unarisen fetter, and how there comes to be
the abandoning of the arisen fetter, and how there comes to be
the future non-arising of the abandoned fetter.
41. "In this way he abides contemplating mind-objects as
mind-objects internally, externally, and both internally and
externally...And he abides independent, not clinging to anything
in the world. That is how a bhikkhu abides contemplating
mind-objects as mind-objects in terms of the six internal and
external bases.
Dhammānupassanā āyatanapabbaṃ
117. ‘‘Puna caparaṃ, bhikkhave, bhikkhu dhammesu dhammānupassī viharati chasu ajjhattikabāhiresu āyatanesu. Kathañca pana, bhikkhave, bhikkhu dhammesu dhammānupassī viharati chasu ajjhattikabāhiresu āyatanesu?
‘‘Idha , bhikkhave, bhikkhu cakkhuñca pajānāti, rūpe ca pajānāti, yañca tadubhayaṃ paṭicca uppajjati saṃyojanaṃ tañca pajānāti, yathā ca anuppannassa saṃyojanassa uppādo hoti tañca pajānāti, yathā ca uppannassa saṃyojanassa pahānaṃ hoti tañca pajānāti, yathā ca pahīnassa saṃyojanassa āyatiṃ anuppādo hoti tañca pajānāti.
‘‘Sotañca pajānāti, sadde ca pajānāti, yañca tadubhayaṃ paṭicca uppajjati saṃyojanaṃ tañca pajānāti, yathā ca anuppannassa saṃyojanassa uppādo hoti tañca pajānāti, yathā ca uppannassa saṃyojanassa pahānaṃ hoti tañca pajānāti, yathā ca pahīnassa saṃyojanassa āyatiṃ anuppādo hoti tañca pajānāti.
‘‘Ghānañca pajānāti, gandhe ca pajānāti, yañca tadubhayaṃ paṭicca uppajjati saṃyojanaṃ tañca pajānāti, yathā ca anuppannassa saṃyojanassa uppādo hoti tañca pajānāti, yathā ca uppannassa saṃyojanassa pahānaṃ hoti tañca pajānāti, yathā ca pahīnassa saṃyojanassa āyatiṃ anuppādo hoti tañca pajānāti.
‘‘Jivhañca pajānāti, rase ca pajānāti, yañca tadubhayaṃ paṭicca uppajjati saṃyojanaṃ tañca pajānāti, yathā ca anuppannassa saṃyojanassa uppādo hoti tañca pajānāti, yathā ca uppannassa saṃyojanassa pahānaṃ hoti tañca pajānāti, yathā ca pahīnassa saṃyojanassa āyatiṃ anuppādo hoti tañca pajānāti.
‘Kāyañca pajānāti, phoṭṭhabbe ca pajānāti, yañca tadubhayaṃ paṭicca uppajjati saṃyojanaṃ tañca pajānāti, yathā ca anuppannassa saṃyojanassa uppādo hoti tañca pajānāti, yathā ca uppannassa saṃyojanassa pahānaṃ hoti tañca pajānāti, yathā ca pahīnassa saṃyojanassa āyatiṃ anuppādo hoti tañca pajānāti.
‘‘Manañca pajānāti, dhamme ca pajānāti, yañca tadubhayaṃ paṭicca uppajjati saṃyojanaṃ tañca pajānāti, yathā ca anuppannassa saṃyojanassa uppādo hoti tañca pajānāti, yathā ca uppannassa saṃyojanassa pahānaṃ hoti tañca pajānāti, yathā ca pahīnassa saṃyojanassa āyatiṃ anuppādo hoti tañca pajānāti.
‘‘Iti ajjhattaṃ vā dhammesu dhammānupassī viharati, bahiddhā vā dhammesu dhammānupassī viharati, ajjhattabahiddhā vā dhammesu dhammānupassī viharati; samudayadhammānupassī vā dhammesu viharati, vayadhammānupassī vā dhammesu viharati, samudayavayadhammānupassī vā dhammesu viharati. ‘Atthi dhammā’ti vā panassa sati paccupaṭṭhitā hoti. Yāvadeva ñāṇamattāya paṭissatimattāya anissito ca viharati na ca kiñci loke upādiyati. Evampi kho, bhikkhave, bhikkhu dhammesu dhammānupassī viharati chasu ajjhattikabāhiresu āyatanesu.
So do you think ear, sound, tongue, taste, and body are not materiality?
SarathW
Posts: 21234
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by SarathW »

:goodpost: Robert
How about?
There is the case where he discerns the eye, he discerns forms, he discerns the fetter that arises dependent on both.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
asahi
Posts: 2732
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2020 4:23 pm

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by asahi »

Imo SN 45.62 and SN 46.51 actually do approve and support the 4th establishment of mindfulness as stated in SN 47.42 . Whereas Mn 1 is about wrong mindfulness wrong attention which give rise to the notion of self due to ignorance . It appears Mn10 is about the mindfulness and practices on how those body elements arising and passing away per dependent origination and not really on the focus of physical matter or materiality itself . For example the discerning of forms is about mindfulness on how forms arises and passes away in which the aim is for the overcoming of sorrows and griefs, for the going down of sufferings and miseries, for winning the right path, for realising Nibbāna .
There is the body,’ his mindfulness is established precisely to the extent necessary just for knowledge, just for remembrance, and he fares along independently of and not grasping anything in the world.
Pls take note dhamma per mind object and dhamma per dhamma principle and dhamma per the teachings are something different . Imo , exposition of dhamma per the suttas and per abhidhamma appear not of same taste . The evolving of dhamma into abhidhamma as a systematic philosophical method to investigate into the nature of the person and other phenomena has strayed away from its supposed proper path .

:thanks:
No bashing No gossiping
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by chownah »

chownah wrote: Sat Jun 12, 2021 3:12 pm
DooDoot wrote: Sat Jun 12, 2021 3:11 am
But there are many other suttas, such as SN 12,.17, Ud 8.1, etc, which says: "suffering exists"; "Nibbana exists".
I think you are misrepresenting what is said in the suttas.....I have looked at two different translations of Ud8.1 and neither of them contain the text "Nibbana exists" as you claim. In fact I have on several occasions asked people who claimed that the suttas say "nibbana exists" to find such a quote and so far no one has been able to find one. It seems that nowhere in the suttas is the declaration that "nibbana exists". If you have found one please bring a link as I would be very interested inseeing it.
chownah
Have you found a sutta where it says "nibbana exists"?.....if you can not find one I would be glad to see you acknowledge that you misrepresented what the suttas say....or.....if you do bring a link to a reference I will be glad to know about it!
chownah
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5613
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by robertk »

retrofuturist wrote: Sat Jun 12, 2021 2:03 am Greetings,

The following refutes the Theravada tradition's dramatic origin story for the Abhidhamma...
DN16 wrote:I have set forth the Dhamma without making any distinction of esoteric and exoteric doctrine; there is nothing, Ananda, with regard to the teachings that the Tathagata holds to the last with the closed fist of a teacher who keeps some things back.
Given the Buddha did not teach it, those who say he did slander the Buddha....
AN 2.23 wrote:"Monks, these two slander the Tathagata. Which two? He who explains what was not said or spoken by the Tathagata as said or spoken by the Tathagata. And he who explains what was said or spoken by the Tathagata as not said or spoken by the Tathagata. These are two who slander the Tathagata."
And what did he hold back? Abhidhamma was taught firstly in the Deva world to his mother and then the summary given to Sariputta who in taught it in full to his 500 students - why do you think it was "held to the last with the closed fist of a teacher"?
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by DooDoot »

retrofuturist wrote: Sat Jun 12, 2021 11:54 pm Greetings DooDoot,

It would appear then that you've misconstrued the Sutta, as the Pali for MN1 most certainly makes repeated reference to perception (e.g. saññatvā and sañjānāti)
Definitely not. Saññatvā and sañjānāti are not the unwholesome qualities mentioned in the sutta. :smile:
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