Why Is There Anything At All?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: Why Is There Anything At All?

Post by cappuccino »

dicsoncandra wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 6:29 pm
cappuccino wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 6:26 pm
dicsoncandra wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 6:25 pm free from assumption
free from what assumption?
Assumption refers to upādāna. Freedom from appropriation of phenomena as 'I', 'mine' or 'myself'
Nirvana is everlasting & without stress


hence not boring…
User avatar
dicsoncandra
Posts: 257
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2021 3:19 pm
Location: Singapore
Contact:

Re: Why Is There Anything At All?

Post by dicsoncandra »

cappuccino wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 6:33 pm
dicsoncandra wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 6:29 pm
cappuccino wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 6:26 pm

free from what assumption?
Assumption refers to upādāna. Freedom from appropriation of phenomena as 'I', 'mine' or 'myself'
Nirvana is everlasting & without stress


hence not boring…
Again, you're seeing it at the level of jāti, not bhāva.

(MN 72 - Aggi-Vacchagotta Sutta)
"How is it, Master Gotama, when Master Gotama is asked if he holds the view 'the cosmos is eternal...'... 'after death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist: only this is true, anything otherwise is worthless,' he says '...no...' in each case. Seeing what drawback, then, is Master Gotama thus entirely dissociated from each of these ten positions?"

"Vaccha, the position that 'the cosmos is eternal' is a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views. It is accompanied by suffering, distress, despair, & fever, and it does not lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation; to calm, direct knowledge, full Awakening, Unbinding.

"The position that 'the cosmos is not eternal'...

"...'the cosmos is finite'...

"...'the cosmos is infinite'...

"...'the soul & the body are the same'...

"...'the soul is one thing and the body another'...

"...'after death a Tathagata exists'...

"...'after death a Tathagata does not exist'...

"...'after death a Tathagata both exists & does not exist'...

"...'after death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist'... does not lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation; to calm, direct knowledge, full Awakening, Unbinding."

"Does Master Gotama have any position at all?"

"A 'position,' Vaccha, is something that a Tathagata has done away with. What a Tathagata sees is this: 'Such is form, such its origination, such its disappearance; such is feeling, such its origination, such its disappearance; such is perception...such are fabrications...such is consciousness, such its origination, such its disappearance.' Because of this, I say, a Tathagata — with the ending, fading away, cessation, renunciation, & relinquishment of all construings, all excogitations, all I-making & mine-making & obsessions with conceit — is, through lack of clinging/sustenance, released."

"But, Master Gotama, the monk whose mind is thus released: Where does he reappear?"

"'Reappear,' Vaccha, doesn't apply."

"In that case, Master Gotama, he does not reappear."

"'Does not reappear,' Vaccha, doesn't apply."

"...both does & does not reappear."

"...doesn't apply."

"...neither does nor does not reappear."

"...doesn't apply."

"How is it, Master Gotama, when Master Gotama is asked if the monk reappears... does not reappear... both does & does not reappear... neither does nor does not reappear, he says, '...doesn't apply' in each case. At this point, Master Gotama, I am befuddled; at this point, confused. The modicum of clarity coming to me from your earlier conversation is now obscured."

"Of course you're befuddled, Vaccha. Of course you're confused. Deep, Vaccha, is this phenomenon, hard to see, hard to realize, tranquil, refined, beyond the scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by the wise. For those with other views, other practices, other satisfactions, other aims, other teachers, it is difficult to know. That being the case, I will now put some questions to you. Answer as you see fit. What do you think, Vaccha: If a fire were burning in front of you, would you know that, 'This fire is burning in front of me'?"

"...yes..."

"And suppose someone were to ask you, Vaccha, 'This fire burning in front of you, dependent on what is it burning?' Thus asked, how would you reply?"

"...I would reply, 'This fire burning in front of me is burning dependent on grass & timber as its sustenance.'"

"If the fire burning in front of you were to go out, would you know that, 'This fire burning in front of me has gone out'?"

"...yes..."

"And suppose someone were to ask you, 'This fire that has gone out in front of you, in which direction from here has it gone? East? West? North? Or south?' Thus asked, how would you reply?"

"That doesn't apply, Master Gotama. Any fire burning dependent on a sustenance of grass and timber, being unnourished — from having consumed that sustenance and not being offered any other — is classified simply as 'out' (unbound)."

"Even so, Vaccha, any physical form by which one describing the Tathagata would describe him: That the Tathagata has abandoned, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. Freed from the classification of form, Vaccha, the Tathagata is deep, boundless, hard to fathom, like the sea. 'Reappears' doesn't apply. 'Does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Both does & does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Neither reappears nor does not reappear' doesn't apply.

"Any feeling... Any perception... Any fabrication...

"Any consciousness by which one describing the Tathagata would describe him: That the Tathagata has abandoned, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. Freed from the classification of consciousness, Vaccha, the Tathagata is deep, boundless, hard to fathom, like the sea. 'Reappears' doesn't apply. 'Does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Both does & does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Neither reappears nor does not reappear' doesn't apply."

When this was said, the wanderer Vacchagotta said to the Blessed One: "Master Gotama, it is as if there were a great sala tree not far from a village or town: From inconstancy, its branches and leaves would wear away, its bark would wear away, its sapwood would wear away, so that on a later occasion — divested of branches, leaves, bark, & sapwood — it would stand as pure heartwood. In the same way, Master Gotama's words are divested of branches, leaves, bark, & sapwood and stand as pure heartwood.

"Magnificent, Master Gotama! Magnificent! Just as if he were to place upright what was overturned, to reveal what was hidden, to show the way to one who was lost, or were to carry a lamp into the dark so that those with eyes could see forms, in the same way has Master Gotama — through many lines of reasoning — made the Dhamma clear. I go to Master Gotama for refuge, to the Dhamma, and to the Sangha of monks. May Master Gotama remember me as a lay follower who has gone to him for refuge, from this day forward, for life."

"to place upright what was overturned" is to abandon upādāna, which in my article refers to that perversion of the structural order of things (existence is assumed to precede appearance of phenomena). With the abandonment of upādāna, bhāva ceases in accordance with DO.
arising is manifest;
ceasing is manifest;
change-while-standing is manifest.

Link to website: http://dicsonstable.blog/
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Why Is There Anything At All?

Post by DooDoot »

dicsoncandra wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 1:06 pm what I hinted was that 'presence, which is always positive, validates itself.' and thus appearance is (i.e., unquestionable and unexplainable), after which I proposed the more pertinent question regarding bhava.
The above is using language alien to Buddha-Dhamma, such as "presence" and "appearance".

Dependent origination is twelve conditions and it is best to use the language found therein. For example, "presence" and "appearance" sound like "sense contact" ("phassa"). "Sense contact" is not in inherently related to the arising of suffering, which is why there are many suttas referring to the arising of suffering with sense-contact and the cessation of suffering with sense contact. Arahants continue to have sense contact. Sense contact is not inherently related to "bhava", which is why the 2nd Noble Truth in SN 56.11 does not refer to sense contact. It only refers to craving & bhava. :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
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: Why Is There Anything At All?

Post by cappuccino »

dicsoncandra wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 12:42 am bhāva ceases in accordance with DO.
the Tathagata wrote:'Reappears' doesn't apply. 'Does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Both does & does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Neither reappears nor does not reappear' doesn't apply."
K?
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: Why Is There Anything At All?

Post by cappuccino »

in other words, you don't cease to exist

Buddha wrote:'Does not reappear' doesn't apply.
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Why Is There Anything At All?

Post by DooDoot »

Hello again. The following paragraphs appear possibly contradictory to me:
#1 wrote:Firstly, we need to see that ‘something’ (i.e., whether physical/mental/both) exist only with the presence of consciousness of it (phenomena is present). Presence of phenomena is that which can only be ‘found’, in the form of an experience as a whole.
#2 wrote:To give a sense of how paticcasamuppāda works without going into the specifics, the most general and immediate example would be the process of birth and death, which again is independent of us. One might say that even if one never chose to be born, one can choose to die.
However, the above paragraphs are not contradictory if "birth" & "death" are regarded as "physical or material" and therefore directly not observable.

Does Ajahn Nanamoli teach "jati" & "marana" in Dependent Origiantion are "physical" and therefore not observable? :shrug: :thanks:

The suttas say:
SN 12.20 wrote:And what are the dependently originated phenomena?
Katame ca, bhikkhave, paṭiccasamuppannā dhammā?

Old age and death are impermanent, conditioned, dependently originated, liable to end, vanish, fade away and cease.

Jarāmaraṇaṁ, bhikkhave, aniccaṁ saṅkhataṁ paṭiccasamuppannaṁ khayadhammaṁ vayadhammaṁ virāgadhammaṁ nirodhadhammaṁ.

Birth is are impermanent, conditioned, dependently originated, liable to end, vanish, fade away and cease.
Jāti, bhikkhave, aniccā saṅkhatā paṭiccasamuppannā khayadhammā vayadhammā virāgadhammā nirodhadhammā.

https://suttacentral.net/sn12.20/en/sujato
Last edited by DooDoot on Tue Jun 22, 2021 1:15 am, 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
User avatar
dicsoncandra
Posts: 257
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2021 3:19 pm
Location: Singapore
Contact:

Re: Why Is There Anything At All?

Post by dicsoncandra »

DooDoot wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 12:56 am
dicsoncandra wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 1:06 pm what I hinted was that 'presence, which is always positive, validates itself.' and thus appearance is (i.e., unquestionable and unexplainable), after which I proposed the more pertinent question regarding bhava.
The above is using language alien to Buddha-Dhamma, such as "presence" and "appearance".

Dependent origination is twelve conditions and it is best to use the language found therein. For example, "presence" and "appearance" sound like "sense contact" ("phassa"). "Sense contact" is not in inherently related to the arising of suffering, which is why there are many suttas referring to the arising of suffering with sense-contact and the cessation of suffering with sense contact. Arahants continue to have sense contact. Sense contact is not inherently related to "bhava", which is why the 2nd Noble Truth in SN 56.11 does not refer to sense contact. It only refers to craving & bhava. :smile:
The terminologies aren't used in the Buddha Dhamma but they don't have the notion of phassa to me at all. Phassa can only come to be with the presence and meeting of two things (Sabba Sutta). presence, meeting and consciousness are pre-phassa
arising is manifest;
ceasing is manifest;
change-while-standing is manifest.

Link to website: http://dicsonstable.blog/
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Why Is There Anything At All?

Post by DooDoot »

Also, to add, the article says:
The Buddha analyses phenomena, which simultaneously determine the ‘self’, as the five-assumed-aggregates: form, feeling, perception, volitional formation, consciousness.
Whilst very pedantic, according to the Pali pundits, it appears the Pali does not accommodate the translation: "the five-assumed-aggregates", which would be similar to "the five-clung-to-aggregates". "Assumed" or "clung-to" are past tense but "upadana" is not past tense. According to the pundits, your Nanamolic translation would have to be: the "five-aggregates-of-assumption" or "the five aggregates subject to assumption" or the "five-assumption-aggregates". :smile:
They are otherwise called ‘five heaps’ and not ‘one heap of five’ as they too are compounded and dependently co-arisen
SN 22.48 says there are two types of five aggregates, namely: (i) mere five aggregates (devoid of attachment/assumption) and (ii) the five aggregates subject to attachment/assumption. Can you or Ajahn Nanamoli quote any suttas that say the five mere aggregates are "dependently originated"? Thanks :shrug: :thanks:
Thus, the five aggregates are inherently inaccessible to us, unownable
I don't understand the above. Please kindly clarify? Thanks
Assumption (or clinging) is neither the same nor different from the five aggregates
The above sounds wrong. The sutta refer to the "five-clinging-aggregates" rather than the mere five aggregates, as follows::
"Is it the case, lady, that clinging is the same thing as the five clinging-aggregates or is it something separate?"

"Friend Visakha, neither is clinging the same thing as the five clinging-aggregates, nor is it something separate. Whatever desire & passion there is with regard to the five clinging-aggregates, that is the clinging there."

MN 44
: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
User avatar
dicsoncandra
Posts: 257
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2021 3:19 pm
Location: Singapore
Contact:

Re: Why Is There Anything At All?

Post by dicsoncandra »

DooDoot wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 1:14 am
Hello again. The following paragraphs appear possibly contradictory to me:
#1 wrote:Firstly, we need to see that ‘something’ (i.e., whether physical/mental/both) exist only with the presence of consciousness of it (phenomena is present). Presence of phenomena is that which can only be ‘found’, in the form of an experience as a whole.
#2 wrote:To give a sense of how paticcasamuppāda works without going into the specifics, the most general and immediate example would be the process of birth and death, which again is independent of us. One might say that even if one never chose to be born, one can choose to die.
However, the above paragraphs are not contradictory if "birth" & "death" are regarded as "physical or material" and therefore directly not observable.

Does Ajahn Nanamoli teach "jati" & "marana" in Dependent Origiantion are "physical" and therefore not observable? :shrug: :thanks:

The suttas say:
SN 12.20 wrote:And what are the dependently originated phenomena?
Katame ca, bhikkhave, paṭiccasamuppannā dhammā?

Old age and death are impermanent, conditioned, dependently originated, liable to end, vanish, fade away and cease.

Jarāmaraṇaṁ, bhikkhave, aniccaṁ saṅkhataṁ paṭiccasamuppannaṁ khayadhammaṁ vayadhammaṁ virāgadhammaṁ nirodhadhammaṁ.

Birth is are impermanent, conditioned, dependently originated, liable to end, vanish, fade away and cease.
Jāti, bhikkhave, aniccā saṅkhatā paṭiccasamuppannā khayadhammā vayadhammā virāgadhammā nirodhadhammā.

https://suttacentral.net/sn12.20/en/sujato
I obviously wrote 'birth' and 'death' are occurences in the present and thus observable here and now? At the start I said they are mere manifestations of existence. Also, see my signature. I try my best to articulate things but honestly I am not responsible for another's non-understanding. If you're really interested on how Ajahn Nyanamoli approaches the Dhamma then you can go straight to the source material. Nitpicking the terminologies won't help though, not if you want to see the context of the teaching and understand it

Edit: what i did imply in the article is that not only 'death' is observable in the present but it can be understood with the presence of birth alone. The physical birth and death was just an example i gave for the lay-est of people
Last edited by dicsoncandra on Tue Jun 22, 2021 2:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
arising is manifest;
ceasing is manifest;
change-while-standing is manifest.

Link to website: http://dicsonstable.blog/
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Why Is There Anything At All?

Post by DooDoot »

dicsoncandra wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 2:01 am The terminologies aren't used in the Buddha Dhamma but they don't have the notion of phassa to me at all. Phassa can only come to be with the presence and meeting of two things (Sabba Sutta). presence, meeting and consciousness are pre-phassa
The Sabba Sutta is an internet fad and probably some argument against Brahminism. It is best to avoid it.

The Suttas say phassa can only come to be with the presence and meeting of three things, namely, internal sense organ, external sense object and sense consciousness (MN 148), as follows:
The six classes of contact should be understood.’ So it was said. And with reference to what was this said? Dependent on the eye and forms, eye-consciousness arises; the meeting of the three is contact. Dependent on the ear and sounds, ear-consciousness arises; the meeting of the three is contact. Dependent on the nose and odours, nose-consciousness arises; the meeting of the three is contact. Dependent on the tongue and flavours, tongue-consciousness arises; the meeting of the three is contact. Dependent on the body and tangibles, body-consciousness arises; the meeting of the three is contact. Dependent on the mind and mind-objects, mind-consciousness arises; the meeting of the three is contact. So it was with reference to this that it was said: ‘The six classes of contact should be understood. ’ This is the fourth set of six.

MN 148

Therefore, either you &/or Nanamoli are saying:

1. presence = external sense object

2. meeting = internal sense organ

3. consciousness = sense consciousness

Is this correct? Thanks :thanks: Its good if we can clarify the terminology used 1st.
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
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Why Is There Anything At All?

Post by DooDoot »

dicsoncandra wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 2:07 am I obviously wrote 'birth' and 'death' are occurences in the present and thus observable here and now? At the start I said they are mere manifestations of existence. Also, see my signature. I try my best to articulate things but honestly I am not responsible for another's non-understanding.
Thanks. But you wrote:
To give a sense of how paticcasamuppāda works without going into the specifics, the most general and immediate example would be the process of birth and death, which again is independent of us. One might say that even if one never chose to be born, one can choose to die.
You later wrote:
Thus, ‘birth’ and ‘death’ is always an occurrence in the present and that the reality (or possibility) of death, regardless of its manifestation at any given point in time, is directly conditioned upon the manifestation of birth: with birth, death applies.
The above is not clear. What exactly is the "birth" occurring in the present? How is "birth" a manifestation of "bhava"? Thanks :thanks:
If you're really interested on how Ajahn Nyanamoli approaches the Dhamma then you can go straight to the source material.
Ajahn Nyanamoli use of the English language generally eludes me.
Nitpicking the terminologies won't help though, not if you want to see the context of the teaching and understand it
Sorry but i am not nitpicking. You are using alien foreign words and making statements such as: "the process of birth and death, which again is independent of us"; which appear to say birth & death are not objects of direct experience. Sorry but the onus is on you to make your words clear. Thanks
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
dicsoncandra
Posts: 257
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2021 3:19 pm
Location: Singapore
Contact:

Re: Why Is There Anything At All?

Post by dicsoncandra »

DooDoot wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 2:14 am
dicsoncandra wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 2:01 am The terminologies aren't used in the Buddha Dhamma but they don't have the notion of phassa to me at all. Phassa can only come to be with the presence and meeting of two things (Sabba Sutta). presence, meeting and consciousness are pre-phassa
The Sabba Sutta is an internet fad and probably some argument against Brahminism. It is best to avoid it.

The Suttas say phassa can only come to be with the presence and meeting of three things, namely, internal sense organ, external sense object and sense consciousness (MN 148), as follows:
The six classes of contact should be understood.’ So it was said. And with reference to what was this said? Dependent on the eye and forms, eye-consciousness arises; the meeting of the three is contact. Dependent on the ear and sounds, ear-consciousness arises; the meeting of the three is contact. Dependent on the nose and odours, nose-consciousness arises; the meeting of the three is contact. Dependent on the tongue and flavours, tongue-consciousness arises; the meeting of the three is contact. Dependent on the body and tangibles, body-consciousness arises; the meeting of the three is contact. Dependent on the mind and mind-objects, mind-consciousness arises; the meeting of the three is contact. So it was with reference to this that it was said: ‘The six classes of contact should be understood. ’ This is the fourth set of six.

MN 148

Therefore, either you &/or Nanamoli are saying:

1. presence = external sense object

2. meeting = internal sense organ

3. consciousness = sense consciousness

Is this correct? Thanks :thanks: Its good if we can clarify the terminology used 1st.
I'm not very confident in my understanding of paticcasamuppāda in regard to the six sense-bases hence why I avoided writing about it. But from my currently limited understanding, that is incorrect (edit: with regard to equating them one to one the way you did), but I will have to refer back to the source material and I will. I refrain from explaining on this and would refer you direct to the source. Also, the articulations are my own, not the Ajahn's. I picked up some of his terminologies and freely wrote on it based on my understanding without anyone else's guidance or supervision

2nd edit: let me just state why it's incorrect from my understanding. It's because of the definition of paticcasamuppāda I used as per the article and hence why it requires simultaneous presence of internal sense organ and external sense object. It doesnt go linearly from 1 to 2 to 3 like that. I'll re-read the source material to be sure

Regards
arising is manifest;
ceasing is manifest;
change-while-standing is manifest.

Link to website: http://dicsonstable.blog/
User avatar
dicsoncandra
Posts: 257
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2021 3:19 pm
Location: Singapore
Contact:

Re: Why Is There Anything At All?

Post by dicsoncandra »

DooDoot wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 2:23 am
dicsoncandra wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 2:07 am I obviously wrote 'birth' and 'death' are occurences in the present and thus observable here and now? At the start I said they are mere manifestations of existence. Also, see my signature. I try my best to articulate things but honestly I am not responsible for another's non-understanding.
Thanks. But you wrote:
To give a sense of how paticcasamuppāda works without going into the specifics, the most general and immediate example would be the process of birth and death, which again is independent of us. One might say that even if one never chose to be born, one can choose to die.
You later wrote:
Thus, ‘birth’ and ‘death’ is always an occurrence in the present and that the reality (or possibility) of death, regardless of its manifestation at any given point in time, is directly conditioned upon the manifestation of birth: with birth, death applies.
The above is not clear. What exactly is the "birth" occurring in the present? How is "birth" a manifestation of "bhava"? Thanks :thanks:
If you're really interested on how Ajahn Nyanamoli approaches the Dhamma then you can go straight to the source material.
Ajahn Nyanamoli use of the English language generally eludes me.
Nitpicking the terminologies won't help though, not if you want to see the context of the teaching and understand it
Sorry but i am not nitpicking. You are using alien foreign words and making statements such as: "the process of birth and death, which again is independent of us"; which appear to say birth & death are not objects of direct experience. Sorry but the onus is on you to make your words clear. Thanks
The reason why I wrote 'process' is because this is a generic English word but later on the reader would see that it gives the false impression. I'll revisit DW later, I got work to do as a layman. I'll re-look into the exact wordin whether manifestation of bhava or so on. with bhava, jati is. perhaps 'manifestation' is better applied on the phenomena not on bhava, I'll re-read and reconsider. Try writing one and see how tricky it is :smile:

edit: I may replace the word 'manifestation' with 'form' in my article. I'll give it a proper re-reading
2nd edit: revised the article on the precise application of 'manifestation' with regard to 'phenomena' and not to 'bhava'
arising is manifest;
ceasing is manifest;
change-while-standing is manifest.

Link to website: http://dicsonstable.blog/
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Why Is There Anything At All?

Post by DooDoot »

OK. thanks for your interesting article. at least you have one cute fan giving you flowers. :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
User avatar
dicsoncandra
Posts: 257
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2021 3:19 pm
Location: Singapore
Contact:

Re: Why Is There Anything At All?

Post by dicsoncandra »

DooDoot wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 3:10 am OK. thanks for your interesting article. at least you have one cute fan giving you flowers. :anjali:
idk if you're being sarcastic but I can tell you that I do take your inputs and have amended it accordingly where I see fit. I can take criticisms but please be nice, that's all

edit: regardless, thank you for your input

Regards
arising is manifest;
ceasing is manifest;
change-while-standing is manifest.

Link to website: http://dicsonstable.blog/
Post Reply