Without discoverable beginning

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
asahi
Posts: 2732
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2020 4:23 pm

Re: Without discoverable beginning

Post by asahi »

SDC wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 12:23 pm
asahi wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 12:03 pm If you place ignorance as the reason for samsara continuation , it does not implied samsara do not have a beginning point nor samsara has a beginning point .
I never said it did.

I said it was unavailable.
The sutta about ignorance (or even craving) unrelated to OP asking the samsara starting point .
No bashing No gossiping
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9062
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Without discoverable beginning

Post by SDC »

asahi wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 2:45 pm
SDC wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 12:23 pm
asahi wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 12:03 pm If you place ignorance as the reason for samsara continuation , it does not implied samsara do not have a beginning point nor samsara has a beginning point .
I never said it did.

I said it was unavailable.
The sutta about ignorance (or even craving) unrelated to OP asking the samsara starting point .
I’m so glad you think so :hug: …but I disagree.

I’ve thoroughly presented my reasoning (feel free to disagree), perhaps you should do the same instead of sulking.
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
asahi
Posts: 2732
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2020 4:23 pm

Re: Without discoverable beginning

Post by asahi »

SDC wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 3:07 pm but I disagree.

I’ve thoroughly presented my reasoning (feel free to disagree), .
:D

The question is asking the samsara has starting point or not ! Whereas the ignorance is related to something "internal" . Are you saying ignorance are the cause of beginning of whole samsara ?


:roll:
No bashing No gossiping
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9062
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Without discoverable beginning

Post by SDC »

asahi wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 3:35 pm
SDC wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 3:07 pm but I disagree.

I’ve thoroughly presented my reasoning (feel free to disagree), .
:D

The question is asking the samsara has starting point or not ! Whereas the ignorance is related to something "internal" . Are you saying ignorance are the cause of beginning of whole samsara ?


:roll:
I think you’re having difficulty understanding the suttas I posted and my position. You just kept saying that I was wrong, and now all of the sudden you are asking questions. Are you asking because you don’t actually understand the point I was trying to make?

Perhaps you should explain why you think ignorance has nothing to do with an undiscoverable beginning. Can you do that?
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
asahi
Posts: 2732
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2020 4:23 pm

Re: Without discoverable beginning

Post by asahi »

SDC wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 3:44 pm I think you’re having difficulty understanding the suttas I posted and my position. You just kept saying that I was wrong, and now all of the sudden you are asking questions. Are you asking because you don’t actually understand the point I was trying to make?

Perhaps you should explain why you think ignorance has nothing to do with an undiscoverable beginning. Can you do that?
Did i say you are wrong ? I just say the suttas are unrelated .
Put it this way , perhaps i dont understand how you relate it (ignorance) vs to finding a beginning point of samsara . Ignorance is a present state of mind . If next moment a person is not in ignorance state (enlightened) He still cannot find the beginning point of samsara . So my point is to find a starting point of samsara has nothing to do with ignorance . Whether there is a starting point or not no one knows . The reason that it is undiscoverable is not because of ignorance of the mind .


:anjali:
No bashing No gossiping
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9062
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Without discoverable beginning

Post by SDC »

asahi wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 4:00 pm Did i say you are wrong ? I just say the suttas are unrelated .
Put it this way , perhaps i dont understand how you relate it (ignorance) vs to finding a beginning point of samsara . Ignorance is a present state of mind . If next moment a person is not in ignorance state (enlightened) He still cannot find the beginning point of samsara . So my point is to find a starting point of samsara has nothing to do with ignorance . Whether there is a starting point or not no one knows . The reason that it is undiscoverable is not because of ignorance of the mind .
I do get your point, and I appreciate you clarifying it.

To reiterate, I never said there was a starting point, nor did I say ignorance was obscuring it. What I was saying was that there is no point where there was no ignorance. If there is samsara, there is ignorance. So if one were to search for a starting point, they would never find one.

It seems only an arahant would know this for sure. It seems they would understand that ignorance was an inherent condition for the cycle of wandering. In other words, they would know what kept the cycle intact. That is what AN 10.61 describes:
Bhikkhus, this is said: ‘A first point of ignorance, bhikkhus, is not seen such that before this there was no ignorance and afterward it came into being.’ Still, ignorance is seen to have a specific condition.
I think we disagree on whether samsara is one thing and experience of suffering is another. Do you think these are two different things? I don’t think they are two different things. I think “wandering on” is the same as “this mass of suffering”. Is this where we disagree?
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
asahi
Posts: 2732
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2020 4:23 pm

Re: Without discoverable beginning

Post by asahi »

SDC wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 4:19 pm I think we disagree on whether samsara is one thing and experience of suffering is another. Do you think these are two different things? I don’t think they are two different things. I think “wandering on” is the same as “this mass of suffering”. Is this where we disagree?
I think if we are to say samsara is individual internal experience ie suffering , we could agree no conflict on this . However If we are to refer samsara as the whole of physical existence , then that appears to be of different domain . Did Buddha denied the sphere of external existence ? It appears the Buddha didnt reject something external to the five aggregates . After an arahant body disintegrates , the external physical world are still around , the cycle of samsara seems still in operation . Goodnite .

:heart:
No bashing No gossiping
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9062
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Without discoverable beginning

Post by SDC »

asahi wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 4:41 pm
SDC wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 4:19 pm I think we disagree on whether samsara is one thing and experience of suffering is another. Do you think these are two different things? I don’t think they are two different things. I think “wandering on” is the same as “this mass of suffering”. Is this where we disagree?
I think if we are to say samsara is individual internal experience ie suffering , we could agree no conflict on this . However If we are to refer samsara as the whole of physical existence , then that appears to be of different domain . Did Buddha denied the sphere of external existence ? It appears the Buddha didnt reject something external to the five aggregates . After an arahant body disintegrates , the external physical world are still around , the cycle of samsara seems still in operation . Goodnite .

:heart:
Good night, I hope we can catch up tomorrow. :smile:

My response may take us off topic, but it may be good food for thought for the OP.

Let’s start here:
SN 35.23 wrote: At Savatthi. “Bhikkhus, I will teach you the all. Listen to that….

“And what, bhikkhus, is the all? The eye and forms, the ear and sounds, the nose and odours, the tongue and tastes, the body and tactile objects, the mind and mental phenomena. This is called the all.

“If anyone, bhikkhus, should speak thus: ‘Having rejected this all, I shall make known another all’—that would be a mere empty boast on his part. If he were questioned he would not be able to reply and, further, he would meet with vexation. For what reason? Because, bhikkhus, that would not be within his domain.”
SN 35.68 wrote: Venerable sir, it is said, ‘the world, the world.’ In what way, venerable sir, might there be the world or the description of the world?”

“Where there is the eye, Samiddhi, where there are forms, eye-consciousness, things to be cognized by eye-consciousness, there the world exists or the description of the world.

“Where there is the ear … the mind, where there are mental phenomena, mind-consciousness, things to be cognized by mind-consciousness, there the world exists or the description of the world.

“Where there is no eye, Samiddhi, no forms, no eye-consciousness, no things to be cognized by eye-consciousness, there the world does not exist nor any description of the world.

“Where there is no ear … no mind, no mental phenomena, no mind-consciousness, no things to be cognized by mind-consciousness, there the world does not exist nor any description of the world.”
The existence of an “external world enduring” requires the assumption of another all; of another’s point of view. If someone I know dies, from my point of view, the world did not end with their death. Taking both points of view into consideration, it can logically said that the external world endures. However, that required the conceived bridging of points of view, which is nothing other than the assumption of another all (described above). I didn’t die in this scenario, so my point of view has no bearing on any other and vice versa. Wandering on cannot be described in this fashion. It must pertain to suffering here and now if it is to be described rightly.

Indeed, the Buddha did not deny the world; he did not deny the six sense base; but he didn’t describe understanding the world or suffering by means of this bridging of points of view . When it comes to descriptions of suffering and the way leading to the cessation of suffering, it is always from the point of view of puthujjana or ariya, not knowing and knowing. It is never from a public position. Additionally, the aggregates, the sense bases and the elements are clearly distinguished in a series of suttas, but none imply more than the all. None imply a public experience that retains the point of view of others for the revelation of knowledge.

That being said (and you are still free to disagree), ignorance as the condition for the non-knowing of the four noble truths is reason for wandering on. It was always the reason for wandering on. I do not think this is a linear scheme. Seems to me ignorance is the basis for the endurance of linear growth (or just outward growth in general, i.e. proliferation), which of course, all falls when the body dies. The wrong view is to live out into this proliferation, and depend on things that could never have been mine to control - desire and lust keep it there again and again. So looking into the details of a past wandering on would always show a non-knowing of what was wrong.
Last edited by bodom on Thu Jul 29, 2021 10:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: User request
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
asahi
Posts: 2732
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2020 4:23 pm

Re: Without discoverable beginning

Post by asahi »

SDC wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 6:47 pm
The existence of an “external world enduring” requires the assumption of another all; of another’s point of view. If someone I know dies, from my point of view, the world did not end with their death. Taking both points of view into consideration, it can logically said that the external world endures. However, that required the conceived bridging of points of view, which is nothing other than the assumption of another all (described above). I didn’t die in this scenario, so my point of view has no bearing on any other and vice versa. Wandering on cannot be described in this fashion. It must pertain to suffering here and now if it is to be described rightly.

Indeed, the Buddha did not deny the world; he did not deny the six sense base; but he didn’t describe understanding the world or suffering by means of this bridging of points of view . When it comes to descriptions of suffering and the way leading to the cessation of suffering, it is always from the point of view of puthujjana or ariya, not knowing and knowing. It is never from a public position. Additionally, the aggregates, the sense bases and the elements are clearly distinguished in a series of suttas, but none imply more than the all. None imply a public experience that retains the point of view of others for the revelation of knowledge.

That being said (and you are still free to disagree), ignorance as the condition for the non-knowing of the four noble truths is reason for wandering on. It was always the reason for wandering on. I do not think this is a linear scheme. Seems to me ignorance is the basis for the endurance of linear growth (or just outward growth in general, i.e. proliferation), which of course, all falls when the body dies. The wrong view is to live out into this proliferation, and depend on things that could never have been mine to control - desire and lust keep it there again and again. So looking into the details of a past wandering on would always show a non-knowing of what was wrong.
Hi SDC , the premises of the OP question appears to be of a public perspective . Therefore , probably i would phrase it differently . The "world" hence so called the samsara (cycle of birth and death) we are talking about appears to be of three phases or three folds . One is the satta loka , second the okassa loka and the third the sankhara loka . What you are referring to are the last one ie sankhara loka . Therefore one can come to an reasoning or inference that externally the first and second loka continues with or without anyone freed from ignorance state .
:thanks:
No bashing No gossiping
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9062
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Without discoverable beginning

Post by SDC »

asahi wrote: Fri Jul 30, 2021 10:12 am Hi SDC , the premises of the OP question appears to be of a public perspective . Therefore , probably i would phrase it differently . The "world" hence so called the samsara (cycle of birth and death) we are talking about appears to be of three phases or three folds . One is the satta loka , second the okassa loka and the third the sankhara loka . What you are referring to are the last one ie sankhara loka . Therefore one can come to an reasoning or inference that externally the first and second loka continues with or without anyone freed from ignorance state .
:thanks:
Hi asahi,

What you say makes sense, but I think giving precedence to the public perspective is problematic. It supports the notion of birth and death as an ongoing cycle found amongst individuals rather than simply within this individual; with these five-clinging-aggregates (which would include everything anyways, i.e. anything seen, heard, smelled, tasted, touched or thought about). In other words, it is a historical view divorced from the the four noble truths. If the individual were to then use this same linear perspective in an attempt to understand their own suffering and wandering on, it will follow suit and generate the idea that it can be traced back to an origin. The Buddha teaches otherwise. He does teach an origin, but not one that is tracible according to a long line of bridged linear form. In terms of the aggregates, see SN 22.5, the sense bases, see SN 35.71, and the elements (along with the previous two), see SN 35.245. (For recollection of past wanderings, see SN 22.79.)

Each wandering on is supported by a lack of knowledge. That is what endures. That is why it keeps going and going. Like a weed that is cut clean to the ground and can grow again. The leaves and stems from the previous growth relate to current growth because they share the same root.

But ultimately you are correct, the OP did ask about this public perspective, and the Buddha did use the simile to emphasize just how long this wandering on has been going. The OP did also express how they were having trouble making sense of why there is a need for the simile if the pile would ultimately be exhausted - but that is the key. The Buddha said the sequence would still not have come back to a first point even when the pile is gone. It seems clear he is saying that someone would waste tons of time looking and would never find a reason for this life here and now...never find it in that direction of looking at the details of other wanderings.

My posts have been to emphasize what the Buddha said elsewhere in the suttas about what is the support for this continued wandering on. So yes, there is a public perspective based on reason, inference, but then there is individual perspective rooted in ignorance, addressed by the four noble truths. If someone were to seek a definitive answer as to why this wandering on is so massive and overwhelming in scope, they should look to ignorance if they want to have complete understanding of the situation, and not simply at what ignorance keeps generating.

This has been an interesting discussion. :smile:
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
Post Reply