ākāsa- space

Discussion of Abhidhamma and related Commentaries
Srilankaputra
Posts: 1086
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2018 3:56 am
Location: Sri Lanka

Re: Milindapañha's incorporation into the canon

Post by Srilankaputra »

Coëmgenu wrote: Sat Oct 03, 2020 5:57 pm
A Theravādin bhikkhu who counts ākāśa as an unconditioned dharma. Of course.

:juggling:
Yes, it's considered an unconditioned dhamma, paññatti. Just not a Paramattha Dhamma. But still, it would be nice to see the reference from the Milindapanha.

Tañhi, bhikkhu, musā yaṃ mosadhammaṃ, taṃ saccaṃ yaṃ amosadhammaṃ nibbānaṃ.

Tasmā evaṃ samannāgato bhikkhu iminā 
paramena saccādhiṭṭhānena samannāgato hoti.

Etañhi, bhikkhu, paramaṃ ariyasaccaṃ yadidaṃ

amosadhammaṃ nibbānaṃ
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 9842
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Milindapañha's incorporation into the canon

Post by Ceisiwr »

Srilankaputra wrote: Sun Oct 04, 2020 2:51 am
Coëmgenu wrote: Sat Oct 03, 2020 5:57 pm
A Theravādin bhikkhu who counts ākāśa as an unconditioned dharma. Of course.

:juggling:
Yes, it's considered an unconditioned dhamma, paññatti. Just not a Paramattha Dhamma. But still, it would be nice to see the reference from the Milindapanha.
Concepts are not classed as being either conditioned or unconditioned. If they were it would mean they really exist. If concepts really exist then “being” or “self” really exists. Concepts have no sabhāva. If the text in question, which I’m aware of but have never read in full, states that space is an unconditioned dhamma then it sounds like its either a Sarvāstivādin text or it’s from before the two schools split.
Saññāvirattassa na santi ganthā,
Paññāvimuttassa na santi mohā;
Saññañca diṭṭhiñca ye aggahesuṃ,
Te ghaṭṭayantā vicaranti loke”ti.


“For one detached from perception, there exist no ties,
for one by wisdom freed, no delusions are there,
but those who have grasped perceptions and views,
they wander the world stirring up strife."


Māgaṇḍiya Sutta
Srilankaputra
Posts: 1086
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2018 3:56 am
Location: Sri Lanka

Re: Milindapañha's incorporation into the canon

Post by Srilankaputra »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Oct 04, 2020 3:03 am
Srilankaputra wrote: Sun Oct 04, 2020 2:51 am
Coëmgenu wrote: Sat Oct 03, 2020 5:57 pm
A Theravādin bhikkhu who counts ākāśa as an unconditioned dharma. Of course.

:juggling:
Yes, it's considered an unconditioned dhamma, paññatti. Just not a Paramattha Dhamma. But still, it would be nice to see the reference from the Milindapanha.
Concepts are not classed as being either conditioned or unconditioned. If they were it would mean they really exist. If concepts really exist then “being” or “self” really exists. Concepts have no sabhāva. If the text in question, which I’m aware of but have never read in full, states that space is an unconditioned dhamma then it sounds like its either a Sarvāstivādin text or it’s from before the two schools split.
To my knowledge, paññatti is classed asankhata. But not Paramattha. Nibbana is the only Paramattha asankhata dhamma.

Tañhi, bhikkhu, musā yaṃ mosadhammaṃ, taṃ saccaṃ yaṃ amosadhammaṃ nibbānaṃ.

Tasmā evaṃ samannāgato bhikkhu iminā 
paramena saccādhiṭṭhānena samannāgato hoti.

Etañhi, bhikkhu, paramaṃ ariyasaccaṃ yadidaṃ

amosadhammaṃ nibbānaṃ
Srilankaputra
Posts: 1086
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2018 3:56 am
Location: Sri Lanka

Re: Milindapañha's incorporation into the canon

Post by Srilankaputra »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Oct 04, 2020 3:03 am
Srilankaputra wrote: Sun Oct 04, 2020 2:51 am
Coëmgenu wrote: Sat Oct 03, 2020 5:57 pm
A Theravādin bhikkhu who counts ākāśa as an unconditioned dharma. Of course.

:juggling:
Yes, it's considered an unconditioned dhamma, paññatti. Just not a Paramattha Dhamma. But still, it would be nice to see the reference from the Milindapanha.
Concepts are not classed as being either conditioned or unconditioned. If they were it would mean they really exist. If concepts really exist then “being” or “self” really exists. Concepts have no sabhāva. If the text in question, which I’m aware of but have never read in full, states that space is an unconditioned dhamma then it sounds like its either a Sarvāstivādin text or it’s from before the two schools split.
Nibbānañca paññatti cāti ime dve dhammā appaccayā nāma asaṅkhatā nāma. Kasmā. Ajātikattā. Yesañhi jāti nāma atthi, uppādo nāma atthi. Te sappaccayānāma saṅkhatā nāma paṭiccasamuppannā nāma. Ime dve dhammā ajātikattā anuppādattā ajātipaccayattāca appaccayā nāma asaṅkhatā nāmāti.

https://tipitaka.org/romn/cscd/e0501n.nrf22.xml

Tañhi, bhikkhu, musā yaṃ mosadhammaṃ, taṃ saccaṃ yaṃ amosadhammaṃ nibbānaṃ.

Tasmā evaṃ samannāgato bhikkhu iminā 
paramena saccādhiṭṭhānena samannāgato hoti.

Etañhi, bhikkhu, paramaṃ ariyasaccaṃ yadidaṃ

amosadhammaṃ nibbānaṃ
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 9842
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Milindapañha's incorporation into the canon

Post by Ceisiwr »

Srilankaputra wrote: Sun Oct 04, 2020 3:18 am
Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Oct 04, 2020 3:03 am
Srilankaputra wrote: Sun Oct 04, 2020 2:51 am

Yes, it's considered an unconditioned dhamma, paññatti. Just not a Paramattha Dhamma. But still, it would be nice to see the reference from the Milindapanha.
Concepts are not classed as being either conditioned or unconditioned. If they were it would mean they really exist. If concepts really exist then “being” or “self” really exists. Concepts have no sabhāva. If the text in question, which I’m aware of but have never read in full, states that space is an unconditioned dhamma then it sounds like its either a Sarvāstivādin text or it’s from before the two schools split.
To my knowledge, paññatti is classed asankhata. But not Paramattha. Nibbana is the only Paramattha asankhata dhamma.
From the Dispeller of Delusion:
127. (15-16) Also the five aggregates are projected (parinipphanna) only, not unprojected; they are formed (sahkhata) only, not unformed; moreover they are produced (nipphanna) too. For among the states that have individual essence (sabhävadhamma) nibbäna alone is unprojected and unproduced. But how about the attainment of cessation (nirodhasamäpatti) and the concept of a name {nämapannatti)V5 The attainment of cessation is not to be called "mundane or supramundane" or "formed or unformed" or "projected or unprojected", but it is produced because it is to be attained by one who attains it. Likewise the concept of a name: for that also is not classed as "mundane", etc., but it is produced, not unproduced; for it is only by taking that one takes a name.36
The only thing which is unconditioned is Nibbana. Concepts are neither conditioned nor unconditioned.
Saññāvirattassa na santi ganthā,
Paññāvimuttassa na santi mohā;
Saññañca diṭṭhiñca ye aggahesuṃ,
Te ghaṭṭayantā vicaranti loke”ti.


“For one detached from perception, there exist no ties,
for one by wisdom freed, no delusions are there,
but those who have grasped perceptions and views,
they wander the world stirring up strife."


Māgaṇḍiya Sutta
Srilankaputra
Posts: 1086
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2018 3:56 am
Location: Sri Lanka

Re: Milindapañha's incorporation into the canon

Post by Srilankaputra »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Oct 04, 2020 4:27 am The only thing which is unconditioned is Nibbana. Concepts are neither conditioned nor unconditioned.
These two Dhammas--Nibbána and pannatti (concept)--are both termed appaccaya (void of causal relation), asankhata (unconditioned). Why? Because they are absolutely void of Becoming. Those things or phenomena, which have birth or genesis are termed sappaccaya (related things), sankhata (conditioned things), and paticcasamuppannas (things arising from a conjuncture of circumstances). Hence those two Dhammas, being void of becoming and happening, are truly to be termed appaccayas and asankhatas.

Nibbānañca paññatti cāti ime dve dhammā appaccayā nāma asaṅkhatā nāma. Kasmā. Ajātikattā. Yesañhi jāti nāma atthi, uppādo nāma atthi. Te sappaccayānāma saṅkhatā nāma paṭiccasamuppannā nāma. Ime dve dhammā ajātikattā anuppādattā ajātipaccayattāca appaccayā nāma asaṅkhatā nāmāti.

https://www.wisdomlib.org/buddhism/book ... c2999.html

Tañhi, bhikkhu, musā yaṃ mosadhammaṃ, taṃ saccaṃ yaṃ amosadhammaṃ nibbānaṃ.

Tasmā evaṃ samannāgato bhikkhu iminā 
paramena saccādhiṭṭhānena samannāgato hoti.

Etañhi, bhikkhu, paramaṃ ariyasaccaṃ yadidaṃ

amosadhammaṃ nibbānaṃ
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 9842
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Milindapañha's incorporation into the canon

Post by Ceisiwr »

Srilankaputra wrote: Sun Oct 04, 2020 4:46 am
Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Oct 04, 2020 4:27 am The only thing which is unconditioned is Nibbana. Concepts are neither conditioned nor unconditioned.
These two Dhammas--Nibbána and pannatti (concept)--are both termed appaccaya (void of causal relation), asankhata (unconditioned). Why? Because they are absolutely void of Becoming. Those things or phenomena, which have birth or genesis are termed sappaccaya (related things), sankhata (conditioned things), and paticcasamuppannas (things arising from a conjuncture of circumstances). Hence those two Dhammas, being void of becoming and happening, are truly to be termed appaccayas and asankhatas.

Nibbānañca paññatti cāti ime dve dhammā appaccayā nāma asaṅkhatā nāma. Kasmā. Ajātikattā. Yesañhi jāti nāma atthi, uppādo nāma atthi. Te sappaccayānāma saṅkhatā nāma paṭiccasamuppannā nāma. Ime dve dhammā ajātikattā anuppādattā ajātipaccayattāca appaccayā nāma asaṅkhatā nāmāti.

https://www.wisdomlib.org/buddhism/book ... c2999.html
That seems to be from Ledi Sayadaw. I can't find anything in the Abhidhamma texts themselves which state that concepts are unconditioned. Within the commentaries, they say they are not. If concepts were unconditioned they would have sabhāva. Since concepts have no sabhāva they are only conventionally true. Being conventionally true they do not truly exist. If something is conditioned or unconditioned then it is ultimately true. How can a non-existent thing be an unconditioned reality along with Nibbana? By your argument, the self is unconditioned.
Saññāvirattassa na santi ganthā,
Paññāvimuttassa na santi mohā;
Saññañca diṭṭhiñca ye aggahesuṃ,
Te ghaṭṭayantā vicaranti loke”ti.


“For one detached from perception, there exist no ties,
for one by wisdom freed, no delusions are there,
but those who have grasped perceptions and views,
they wander the world stirring up strife."


Māgaṇḍiya Sutta
Srilankaputra
Posts: 1086
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2018 3:56 am
Location: Sri Lanka

Re: Milindapañha's incorporation into the canon

Post by Srilankaputra »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Oct 04, 2020 5:16 am How can a non-existent thing be an unconditioned reality along with Nibbana?
They are not considered 'real'.

I like how Bikkhu Bodhi expressed it in the Manual of Abhidhamma,

They(paññatti) are products of mental construction(parikappana), not realities existing by reason of their own nature.

Tañhi, bhikkhu, musā yaṃ mosadhammaṃ, taṃ saccaṃ yaṃ amosadhammaṃ nibbānaṃ.

Tasmā evaṃ samannāgato bhikkhu iminā 
paramena saccādhiṭṭhānena samannāgato hoti.

Etañhi, bhikkhu, paramaṃ ariyasaccaṃ yadidaṃ

amosadhammaṃ nibbānaṃ
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 9842
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Milindapañha's incorporation into the canon

Post by Ceisiwr »

Srilankaputra wrote: Sun Oct 04, 2020 5:30 am
Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Oct 04, 2020 5:16 am How can a non-existent thing be an unconditioned reality along with Nibbana?
They are not considered 'real'.

I like how Bikkhu Bodhi expressed it in the Manual of Abhidhamma,

They(paññatti) are products of mental construction(parikappana), not realities existing by reason of their own nature.
Yes, they seem to be treated in an almost Kantian manner. Strange then to claim they are unconditioned if they are produced by the mind. Even stranger since there is only 1 unconditioned thing.
Saññāvirattassa na santi ganthā,
Paññāvimuttassa na santi mohā;
Saññañca diṭṭhiñca ye aggahesuṃ,
Te ghaṭṭayantā vicaranti loke”ti.


“For one detached from perception, there exist no ties,
for one by wisdom freed, no delusions are there,
but those who have grasped perceptions and views,
they wander the world stirring up strife."


Māgaṇḍiya Sutta
Srilankaputra
Posts: 1086
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2018 3:56 am
Location: Sri Lanka

Re: Milindapañha's incorporation into the canon

Post by Srilankaputra »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Oct 04, 2020 5:50 am Strange then to claim they are unconditioned if they are produced by the mind.
Well, the pali words are parikappana(for paññatti) vs paccupanna(for sankhata Paramattha) . Subtly different.

Tañhi, bhikkhu, musā yaṃ mosadhammaṃ, taṃ saccaṃ yaṃ amosadhammaṃ nibbānaṃ.

Tasmā evaṃ samannāgato bhikkhu iminā 
paramena saccādhiṭṭhānena samannāgato hoti.

Etañhi, bhikkhu, paramaṃ ariyasaccaṃ yadidaṃ

amosadhammaṃ nibbānaṃ
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 9842
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Milindapañha's incorporation into the canon

Post by Ceisiwr »

Srilankaputra wrote: Sun Oct 04, 2020 6:06 am
Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Oct 04, 2020 5:50 am Strange then to claim they are unconditioned if they are produced by the mind.
Well, the pali words are parikappana(for paññatti) vs paccupanna(for sankhata Paramattha) . Subtly different.
Indeed. What I’m now finding more interesting is how paññatti look very much like Kant’s “pure concepts of the understanding” or “categories”. Causality is one such example. I’ve begun to suspect lately that the Abhidhamma and Kant’s Transcendental Idealism are rather close. Perhaps I might make a topic on it at some point. However, for now I’m straying from the OP.

:focus:
Saññāvirattassa na santi ganthā,
Paññāvimuttassa na santi mohā;
Saññañca diṭṭhiñca ye aggahesuṃ,
Te ghaṭṭayantā vicaranti loke”ti.


“For one detached from perception, there exist no ties,
for one by wisdom freed, no delusions are there,
but those who have grasped perceptions and views,
they wander the world stirring up strife."


Māgaṇḍiya Sutta
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 3258
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: ākāsa- space

Post by Coëmgenu »

This is the quote from Milindapanha if anyone is so interested.
[King Menander] ‘Venerable Nāgasena, there are found beings in the world who have come into existence through Karma, and others who are the result of a cause, and others produced by the seasons. Tell me—is there any thing that does not fall under any one of these three heads?’

[Nagasenabhikkhu] ‘ There are two such things, O king. And what are the two? Space, O king, and Nirvāṇa.’

[King Menander] ‘Now do not spoil the word of the Conquerors, Nāgasena, nor answer a question without knowing what you say!’

[Nagasenabhikkhu] ‘What, pray, is it I have said, O king, that you should address me thus?’

[King Menander] ‘Venerable Nāgasena, that is right what you said in respect of space. But with hundreds of reasons did the Blessed One proclaim to his disciples the way to the realisation of Nirvāṇa. And yet you say that Nirvāṇa is not the result of any cause!’

[Nagasenabhikkhu] ‘No doubt, O king, the Blessed One gave hundreds of reasons for our entering on the way to the realisation of Nirvāṇa. But he never told us of a cause out of which Nirvāṇa could be said to be produced.’

[King Menander] ‘Now in this, Nāgasena, we have passed from darkness into greater darkness, from a jungle into a denser jungle, from a thicket into a deeper thicket—inasmuch as you say there is a cause for the realisation of Nirvāṇa, but no cause from which it can arise. If, Nāgasena, there be a cause of the realisation of Nirvāṇa, then we must expect to find a cause of the origin of Nirvāṇa. just, Nāgasena, as because the son has a father, therefore we ought to expect that that father had a father—or because the pupil has a teacher, therefore we ought to expect that the teacher had a teacher—or because the plant came from a seed, therefore we ought to expect that the seed too had come from a seed —just so, Nāgasena, if there be a reason for the realisation of Nirvāṇa, we ought to expect that there is a reason too for its origin—just as if we saw the top of a tree, or of a creeper, we should conclude that it had a middle part, and a root.’

[Nagasenabhikkhu] ‘Nirvāṇa, O king, is unproduceable, and no cause for its origin has been declared.’
(Mil 6.2.5)

This does not read like a Theravadin bhikkhu explaining the Dharma as traditionally handed down by the Pali Abhidhammikas. Does anyone care to disagree here? I'm perfectly fine with that. I am not an expert in Pali Abhidhamma.

Venerable Nagasena later clarifies:
[Nagasenabhikkhu] ‘Well! therefore is it that while a cause for the realisation of Nirvāṇa can be declared, the cause of its origin can not.
Which I suppose is a little bit better on terms of bringing the statement back into something that resembles the Theravada mainline stance, but there is no similar clarification of how space is uncaused and unproduced by the "seasons" (i.e. the changing of time, I presume?).

In the next division of the text, Ven Nagasena continues:
[King Menander] ‘Venerable Nāgasena, what are they who are said, in this connection, to be “Karma-born,” and “cause-born,” and “season-born”? And what is it that is none of these?’

[Nagasenabhikkhu] ‘All beings, O king, who are conscious, are Karma-born (spring into existence as the result of Karma). Fire, and all things growing out of seeds, are cause-born (the result of a pre-existing material cause). The earth, and the hills, water, and wind—all these are season-born (depend for their existence on reasons connected with weather). Space and Nirvāṇa exist independently alike of Karma, and cause, and seasons. Of Nirvāṇa, O king, it cannot be said that it is Karma-born or cause-born or season-born; that it has been, or has not been, or can be produced, that it is past or future or present, that it is perceptible by the eye or the nose or the ear or the tongue or by the sense of touch. But it is perceptible, O king, by the mind. By means of his pure heart, refined and straight, free from the obstacles, free from low cravings, that disciple of the Noble Ones who has fully attained can see Nirvāṇa.’
(Mil 6.2.6)

Now, keep in mind, these quotations are not from the Sarvastivadin Nagasenabhiksusutra. These are from the contemporary Milindapanha text, in which Venerable Nagasena is supposed to be a Theravadin who teaches King Menander the Theravadin Abhidhamma and Theravadin notions of nibbana. Does the text seem like it might have been imperfectly edited to reflect Theravadin ideas, and that occasionally we see Ven Nagasena as a Buddhist in the northerly tradition as opposed to the southerly even in the southern text? Is this hasty to suggest? Is there an Abhidhammika explanation for space being uncaused, unconditioned, here?
The thus come thus gone,
who has neither came nor went,
enthroned on men’s breath,

like the still turtle,
withdraws six appendages
and is clothed in light --

illuminating
the unilluminated
with three shining cures.
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 3960
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: ākāsa- space

Post by robertk »

As far as I can tell Ven. Nagasena doesn't outright say akasa is asankhata. And remember he is referring not to the spaces between rupa (akasa-dhatu) but the unbounded space such as in the Rahulovada sutta.

So in the Milindapanha unbounded space is said to be sabbaso agayho (cannot be grasped), santasaniyo (inspires terro) ananto (infinite) appamano(boundless) and aparimeyyo (immeasurable) It does not cling to anything (alagggo ) is not attached to anything (assato )rests on nothing (appatitthito )and is not obstructed by anything (see Karunadasa p. 94 Buddhist Analysis of Matter ).
YET the Milindapanha never says it is Asankhata.

Even in the Katthavathu it is noted that the Theravada says “Na h’evam vattabbe”( no it is not ) when asked by the opponent if “Akaso sanhato ti” (is akasa sankhata ?) – .

As far as I can see, given my very limited knowledge of pali, this type of space seems to be denoted as some sort of special pannatti.

Anyway I don't think there is a conflict between the Milindapanha and the rest of Theravada- it is just one of those tricky aspects that are approached in different ways.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 9842
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: ākāsa- space

Post by Ceisiwr »

[quote=robertk
As far as I can see, given my very limited knowledge of pali, this type of space seems to be denoted as some sort of special pannatti.
Lately I'm interested in if it could be the equivalent to Kant's intuitions. Space then would be a conceptual construct of the mind that is necessary in order to understand dhammas.
Saññāvirattassa na santi ganthā,
Paññāvimuttassa na santi mohā;
Saññañca diṭṭhiñca ye aggahesuṃ,
Te ghaṭṭayantā vicaranti loke”ti.


“For one detached from perception, there exist no ties,
for one by wisdom freed, no delusions are there,
but those who have grasped perceptions and views,
they wander the world stirring up strife."


Māgaṇḍiya Sutta
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 3960
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: ākāsa- space

Post by robertk »

Posts about Kant , Hume and whatnot, moved here viewtopic.php?f=13&t=38333
Post Reply