What is the detailed meaning of “yaṃ kiñci samuda­ya­ dhammaṃ sabbaṃ taṃ nirōdha dhammam“?

[Ontheway]

I dont say there is no birth of being. But if you practice diligently you can transcend all those that have defilements.

Check MN 117 Great 40

There is right view that is accompanied by defilements, has the attributes of good deeds, and ripens in attachment. And there is right view that is noble, undefiled, transcendent, a factor of the path.

To understand DO and practice N8FP is to transcend all those things such as kamma vipaka, rebirth. Otherwise, there is no way for a person to achieve Arahant (perfected) in this life.

Also if you understand SN 56.11 dhammacakkappavatana Sutta

Mendicants, these two extremes should not be cultivated by one who has gone forth. What two? Indulgence in sensual pleasures, which is low, crude, ordinary, ignoble, and pointless. And indulgence in self-mortification, which is painful, ignoble, and pointless. Avoiding these two extremes, the Realized One woke up by understanding the middle way of practice, which gives vision and knowledge, and leads to peace, direct knowledge, awakening, and extinguishment.

Also check MN 2 sabbasava sutta if one is thinking about past, present or future. They will not be able to break the 3 low fetters.

for uneducated ordinary people…When they attend improperly in this way, one of the following six views arises in them and is taken as a genuine fact. The view: ‘My self exists in an absolute sense.’ The view: ‘My self does not exist in an absolute sense.’ The view: ‘I perceive the self with the self.’ The view: ‘I perceive what is not-self with the self.’ The view: ‘I perceive the self with what is not-self.’ Or they have such a view: ‘This self of mine is he who speaks and feels and experiences the results of good and bad deeds in all the different realms. This self is permanent, everlasting, eternal, and imperishable, and will last forever and ever.’ This is called a misconception, the thicket of views, the desert of views, the trick of views, the evasiveness of views, the fetter of views. An uneducated ordinary person who is fettered by views is not freed from birth, old age, and death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress.They’re not freed from suffering, I say.

Alright, thanks for explanation.

I learned a new interpretation from you today:

DO/DC is not about stopping the rebirth.

And this too:

Buddha Teaching is about Anatta. If there is no self, then how can one is reborn?

[Ceisiwr]

Check MN 117 Great 40
There is right view that is accompanied by defilements, has the attributes of good deeds, and ripens in attachment. And there is right view that is noble, undefiled, transcendent, a factor of the path.

To understand DO and practice N8FP is to transcend all those things such as kamma vipaka, rebirth. Otherwise, there is no way for a person to achieve Arahant (perfected) in this life.

Supramundane Right View there is in the context of meditation. It’s not something you just adopt. It’s foreshadowing the Abhidhamma distinction between mundane Jhanas and Supramundane ones, and the sutta itself is likely a proto-Abhidhamma text.

Also check MN 2 sabbasava sutta if one is thinking about past, present or future. They will not be able to break the 3 low fetters.

How strange then that one of the noble desires is “may I become awakened”.

[Joe.c]

Supramundane Right View there is in the context of meditation. It’s not something you just adopt. It’s foreshadowing the Abhidhamma distinction between mundane Jhanas and Supramundane ones, and the sutta itself is likely a proto-Abhidhamma text.

Are you speaking this from direct experience on meditation to get right view? Because I know this is not the case and Sutta or Vinaya doesn’t support this statement.

I dont know what is mundane or supramundane, because this statement may just be from commentaries.

I only know samma samadhi. If one get on the N8FP, one will have same experience and achieve Nibbana here and now. But you need right view from another Ariya that teach you. Then, you listen and focus carefully and scrutinize the teaching with your mind (mano, hence it is called yoniso mana-sikara).

For right view, Please check MN 43.

“There are two conditions for the arising of right view:
the words of another and proper attention.

These correlate well with 4 factors of stream enterer as well.

Let me give you example in Sutta or Vinaya. Buddha seek 5 vagiya (MN 85), then Buddha managed to convince them to hear his teaching with some efforts. So these 5 ariya, just by hearing dhamma with focus attention. They managed to get into Ariya-hood. There is no meditation at all.

Also Sariputta become sotapanna, just by hearing 1 sentence from Ven. Assaji (in vinaya). Then he went back and told Maha Moggalana same sentence, Maha moggalana also became Sotapanna. At that time, sariputta and moggalana are still outsider.

Also Sariputta become arahant just by listening to Buddha teaching. He realized it when he was fanning Buddha (MN74). Of course, you need to calm your mind first.

Also on MN 56 upali, he became Sotapanna just by hearing 4NT. After his mind is ready, Buddha just teach, no where i can find any sitting meditation.

Also, No where in sutta that I see Buddha asked a householder or new convert to sit and meditate. One need to meditate when you are at Samma Vayama, Samma Sati and Samma Samadhi or close to Non retuner level or arahant level.

Hence, nowadays, i’m confused why people start meditate without right view. If you read sutta and vinaya, you know without right view; meditation can be dangerous. For example, Devadatta, he has iddhi, but no right view. Then he went down to Niraya.

How strange then that one of the noble desires is “may I become awakened”.

Any ariya will want to get awaken but depend on effort, otherwise being unawakened one is to have more suffering in samsara.

[Coëmgenu]

you listen and focus carefully and scrutinize the teaching with your mind (mano, hence it is called yoniso mana-sikara).

Is "manasikara" mana+sikara or manasi+kara though? I'd go with manasi+kara, but I don't actually know for sure how the compound is formed. Manasi has the specific connotation of "intention" as opposed to "mind."

[Ceisiwr]

Are you speaking this from direct experience on meditation to get right view? Because I know this is not the case and Sutta or Vinaya doesn’t support this statement.

I dont know what is mundane or supramundane, because this statement may just be from commentaries.

I only know samma samadhi. If one get on the N8FP, one will have same experience and achieve Nibbana here and now. But you need right view from another Ariya that teach you. Then, you listen and focus carefully and scrutinize the teaching with your mind (mano, hence it is called yoniso mana-sikara).

For right view, Please check MN 43.

My point was that you are possibly relying upon proto-Abhidhamma (dare I even say proto-commentarial) material when you use MN 117 to make your argument regarding dispensing with the view of rebirth, and not at all in the way that "supramundane" was likely to be understood by the reciters of that text. In other words, you are reading your own ideas into the text or you are simply misunderstanding it.

Also Sariputta become sotapanna, just by hearing 1 sentence from Ven. Assaji (in vinaya). Then he went back and told Maha Moggalana same sentence, Maha moggalana also became Sotapanna. At that time, sariputta and moggalana are still outsider.

Also Sariputta become arahant just by listening to Buddha teaching. He realized it when he was fanning Buddha (MN74). Of course, you need to calm your mind first.

Is your position that someone with a calm mind can just hear the Dhamma, understand it intellectually and then awaken? You can find a few suttas of that kind, but how authentic is that view?

[SDC]

you listen and focus carefully and scrutinize the teaching with your mind (mano, hence it is called yoniso mana-sikara).

Is "manasikara" mana+sikara or manasi+kara though? I'd go with manasi+kara, but I don't actually know for sure how the compound is formed. Manasi has the specific connotation of "intention" as opposed to "mind."

As far as I remember from my shallow delve is that manasi is the locative of mano and relates to attention (direction of mind), not intention (cetana). Not sure how it forms manasikāra, but if it manasi+kāra, seems to be related to “the quality of” that attention, and that it can be proper or improper.

[Joe.c]

you listen and focus carefully and scrutinize the teaching with your mind (mano, hence it is called yoniso mana-sikara).

Is "manasikara" mana+sikara or manasi+kara though? I'd go with manasi+kara, but I don't actually know for sure how the compound is formed. Manasi has the specific connotation of "intention" as opposed to "mind."

yeah compound is tricky. It is probably Manasi-kara, then Manasi is from Mana-si.

Looking at the pali dictionary.
mana = masculine & neuter
mind; consciousness. (in compounds it takes the form mano)

But if you study and search the word in Sutta. You will understand why buddha keep using the compound word for easy understanding. What I did is when I have confusion about translation, then I look at the pali word, then I search other sutta for explanation using the Pali word.

I think you meant manasi is attention? because intention is cetana which is compound with mano-san-cetana which is one of the 4 food of being (i.e. more birth, karma).

One also need to use Yoniso Manasikara. Do you know why Yoniso (source)? What is the source? Buddha mentioned it in first verse of Dhammapada.

Manopubbaṅgamā dhammā,
manoseṭṭhā manomayā;
Manasā ce paduṭṭhena,
bhāsati vā karoti vā;
Tato naṁ dukkhamanveti,
cakkaṁva vahato padaṁ.

Cognition (How You think) preceded all experiences,
The cognition predominates and creates the experiences,
with evil thoughts,
Then suffering follows,
As a track follows a wheel.

Hope this will help. If not, let me know I can expand more.

[Coëmgenu]

I think you meant manasi is attention? because intention is cetana which is compound with mano-san-cetana which is one of the 4 food of being (i.e. more birth, karma).

I actually meant the opposite, from the precedence of "nibbānamānaso." Looking at it again though, the lengthening of the A is not insignificant. If it were merely a matter of a/i, buddha/buddhi, it would not be noteworthy necessarily. I had misremembered it as "nibbānamanaso."

I'll be perfectly honest, my Pāli isn't even at 50%. My Sanskrit is much worse. Manasi however has poor representation compared to mānasa. I am not qualified to suggest that manasi is a variant of mānasa, so I can't. Sorry for the non-responce!

[Joe.c]

My point was that you are possibly relying upon proto-Abhidhamma (dare I even say proto-commentarial) material when you use MN 117 to make your argument regarding dispensing with the view of rebirth, and not at all in the way that "supramundane" was likely to be understood by the reciters of that text. In other words, you are reading your own ideas into the text or you are simply misunderstanding it.

Well i guess it is difficult to convince someone who has close mind and not ready for something new. This remind me of SN 41.8 Nigantha Nataputta Sutta, where they also question jhana. And the response of Citta is fitting. When he said he directly know, does he need anyone to tell him this or that?

Is your position that someone with a calm mind can just hear the Dhamma, understand it intellectually and then awaken?

I may just refuse to answer anything from you. There is just no use if your mind is still closed to new idea. Just a hint, I'm not saying you achieve arahant (perfected) right away.

[Joe.c]

I had misremembered it as "nibbānamanaso."

I think you are referring to Snp 4.15, look fine to me. Although some translation is not very accurate. But one get the idea. Mano is the one know the Nibbana concept, but one need to purify Citta first. Because citta contain feelings,

and feeling is condition for tanha. Tanha is conditioned for upadana, etc ... That cause the whole mass suffering.

The most important thing about Buddha Dhamma is, does it match with your personal experience? With practice, do you experience less suffering or more happiness? If more happiness, then you keep it and develop more skills. One need to be able to analyze their own. Not by asking other people to analyze.

Buddha taught what/how to be good and not good. Not whether one is right or wrong. Why? My right may be wrong for you. Your right may be wrong for me. But goodness and not goodness will always the same anywhere. Check AN 3.65 Kesamutti Sutta Buddha explain it in a very beautiful way.

I'll be perfectly honest, my Pāli isn't even at 50%. My Sanskrit is much worse. Manasi however has poor representation compared to mānasa. I am not qualified to suggest that manasi is a variant of mānasa, so I can't. Sorry for the non-responce!

My suggestion, dont worry about translation by your own. Keep practicing like keeping precepts, but of course get right view first. Right view will lead to other steps.

I'm hesitant to suggest a personal since im not sure how open you are with their teaching. I know this forum has known Late Bhante Dhammavuddho and Late Bhante Punnaji.

I learn from them by hearing from them. My practice accelerate very quickly.

But dont trust this reply, try yourself (ehipassiko). If it doesnt improve your practice, then just throw it away. Maybe this is not for you.

One last things dont try to understand concept of Nibbana or even a Jhana. When you are close to non returner, you will know directly.

Sutta has described everythings. However, most people hasnt practice to achieve that level, hence there are so many commentaries. Like a child try to understand university classes, it is just impossible. Then they become frustrated and generate new ideas (aka papanca).

This leads to misunderstanidng of original teaching of Buddha.

[Coëmgenu]

Late Bhante Punnaji

I've a soft spot in my cold heart for Ven Puññaji. I like a lot of what he says, even though I disagree with a lot of his idiosyncrasies, like when the Venerable insists on "insentience" as a translation of "avijjā."

[Joe.c]

I've a soft spot in my cold heart for Ven Puññaji. I like a lot of what he says, even though I disagree with a lot of his idiosyncrasies, like when the Venerable insists on "insentience" as a translation of "avijjā."

I see. Words are human concept. The most important is how you use the words that make you realize and understand the teaching. Hence you also find in Sutta, sometime Buddha used different words to describe certain thing differently. Like Buddha said if you free of desire (Chanda/Raga), you are free of all fetters/dukkha or if you are free of Tanha, you are free of dukkha.

Let me explain why he said insentience for Avijja. It is to describe the sanna-vedayita-nirodha process. Look at SN 41.6 2nd Kamabhu Sutta or MN 43 Maha Vedalla/ MN 44 Cula Vedalla

“What’s the difference between someone who has passed away and a mendicant who has attained the cessation of perception and feeling?”

“When someone dies, their physical, verbal, and mental processes have ceased and stilled; their vitality is spent; their warmth is dissipated; and their faculties have disintegrated. When a mendicant has attained the cessation of perception and feeling, their physical, verbal, and mental processes have ceased and stilled. But their vitality is not spent; their warmth is not dissipated; and their faculties are very clear. That’s the difference between someone who has passed away and a mendicant who has attained the cessation of perception and feeling.”

When you reach sanna-vedayita-nirodha, one will realize there is completely no-self (anatta), because everything is off (there is no Mano-Vinnana & Citta-Sankhara or any other mental activities), so one only realized it when he come back from that state.

How would one said that state? Insentience or Unconsciousness or only Body with no mind? So, Is this body a self or no-self? Is there any mind?

Yeah, not easy to understand if you haven't reach the state. Because this is high level achievement.

What most people don't understand is: the Jhana is related to understanding DO/DC. Also, one can maintain Jhana throughout the day 24/7, once the mind is fully developed (freely move from 1st up to Arupa anytime). Otherwise there is no way for people to reach Arahant (perfected) at this life. Because most people think DO is 3 life times. Also, not all Arahant has psychic power. Psychic power (like to see how kamma work) is not needed to reach Arahant-hood. The most important thing is to get rid of Asava(s) (defilements/influences that come in from senses).

[Coëmgenu]

Two issues I see, one seems to be confusing saññavedayitanirodha and avijjā and the other is claiming that a sage can be in jhāna 24/7. If Gotama Buddha couldn't constantly abide in the jhānas, how much less so can the Sāvakabuddhas? We have to remember that his back ached. The back doesn't ache in jhāna.

Ven Puññaji is very difficult with his "insentience" translation. Vijjā becomes "sentience" in his system. I appreciate the attempt to contextualize though.

[Joe.c]

Yeah, not easy to understand.

I guess I try.

Like he used to said: To switch from existential thinking to experiential thinking is hard.

If you can understand this From MN 43 and SN 22.1, maybe you will get it or maybe not:

MN 43

“Nissaṭṭhena hāvuso, pañcahi indriyehi parisuddhena manoviññāṇena kiṁ neyyan”ti?

“Nissaṭṭhena, āvuso, pañcahi indriyehi parisuddhena manoviññāṇena ‘ananto ākāso’ti ākāsānañcāyatanaṁ neyyaṁ, ‘anantaṁ viññāṇan’ti viññāṇañcāyatanaṁ neyyaṁ, ‘natthi kiñcī’ti ākiñcaññāyatanaṁ neyyan”ti.

SN 22.1

That’s how a person is ailing in body and healthy in mind.”

When one doesn't personalize the panca khandha make it as oneself/mine. There is no Dukkha.