U know underlying tendency because of coincousness of it or its thoughts ... so without that u wont know...auto wrote: ↑Thu Jul 22, 2021 1:54 pmYou are conveniently forgetting about the eye?confusedlayman wrote: ↑Wed Jul 21, 2021 6:35 pmConciiusness arise only along with its object... without arising of conciiusness there is no knowing
Consciousness arises dependent on the eye and its object. In dependent origination chain it is saṅkhāra, dependent on what the viññāṇa arises. It looks like the object and the eye is saṅkhāra and you then should think in these terms.
Also, the absence of an object doesn't mean the consciousness can't get established, when there still are anusaya(underlying tendencies) - nāmarūpa.
If thinking about it frustrates you, it necessarily doesn't mean it is unintelligible.
Besides that the object is just an supporting(ārammaṇa) condition for consciousness becoming established.(based on sn12.40)
Jhana
- confusedlayman
- Posts: 6258
- Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:16 am
- Location: Human Realm (as of now)
Re: Jhana
I may be slow learner but im at least learning...
Re: Jhana
underlying tendencies are towards kāmaguṇa(sense stimulation or pleasure), in case of jhāna.confusedlayman wrote: ↑Thu Jul 22, 2021 10:06 pm U know underlying tendency because of coincousness of it or its thoughts ... so without that u wont know...
Re: Jhana
Auto wrote
My posts are garbage??? and you are the garbage collector??? Pl. go away.
Do not be disruptive.
Senses are not stimulated during Jhana. Is this according to Auto specific jhana? The word "Jhana" stimulates some folks towards mental proliferation.underlying tendencies are towards kāmaguṇa(sense stimulation or pleasure), in case of jhāna.
My posts are garbage??? and you are the garbage collector??? Pl. go away.
Do not be disruptive.
Re: Jhana
I didn't say senses are stimulated during jhana. What i said is that there are underlying tendencies towards sense stimulation.Pulsar wrote: ↑Fri Jul 23, 2021 1:32 am Auto wroteSenses are not stimulated during Jhana. Is this according to Auto specific jhana? The word "Jhana" stimulates some folks towards mental proliferation.wrote:underlying tendencies are towards kāmaguṇa(sense stimulation or pleasure), in case of jhāna.
My posts are garbage??? and you are the garbage collector??? Pl. go away.
Do not be disruptive.
And besides that there are perceptions and attentions accompanied by sensual pleasures besetting.
https://suttacentral.net/an9.41/en/sujato wrote: And so, quite secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unskillful qualities, I entered and remained in the first absorption, which has the rapture and bliss born of seclusion, while placing the mind and keeping it connected.
So kho ahaṁ, ānanda, vivicceva kāmehi vivicca akusalehi dhammehi savitakkaṁ savicāraṁ vivekajaṁ pītisukhaṁ paṭhamaṁ jhānaṁ upasampajja viharāmi.
While I was in that meditation, perceptions and attentions accompanied by sensual pleasures beset me, and that was an affliction for me.
Tassa mayhaṁ, ānanda, iminā vihārena viharato kāmasahagatā saññāmanasikārā samudācaranti. Svassa me hoti ābādho.
Re: Jhana
our dear Auto writes.rest of your post is garbage
That inspires me to write about garbage, on this Sunday morning. Scholars affirm there are two layers of suttas, in the sutta pitaka. Those that clearly communicate the message of the Buddha, belong to the earliest period. With time scholars admit, things that were not taught by the Buddha which I shall label as garbage (for the purpose of this comment, since Auto introduced the term) entered the sutta pitaka.
AN 9.41 would fit the bill, it implies that during meditation afflictions enter the mind. If that were true, clearly then it is wrong meditation.Ani sutta predicted this, of nails being driven into the drum of Dhamma. Sound of such a drum becomes unfamiliar or fainter.
- A brief introduction to right jhana.
not Alara Kalama and Uddaka Ramaputta meditations, which relied on a reified self.Let us consider the prerequisite for buddhist jhana,
Buddha's jhana begins with the right view. Without going into detail
- let us consider the step immediately prior to Samma Samadhi.
Thus, can one entering jhana possibly have afflictions arising?
- Afflictions can only enter via underlying tendencies.
- jhana, informed by the 8-fold path.
Right label for that kind of meditation is wrong meditation, or wrong jhana, or garbage. I would place suttas such as AN 9.41, alongside DN 22 and MN 111.
These suttas are nails in the coffin of Dhamma, that is all I have to say about this garbage.
To clarify using a metaphor, it is generally noted that milk and water are seen as a typical image of a harmonious combination. Bad suttas and good ones are found side by side in the Pali canon. The sensible person learns to avoid the corrupted suttas.
According to one belief, the flamingo has the ability to separate the milk from the mixture while drinking.
Be a flamingo this sunday morning.
With love
Re: Jhana
Underlying tendencies will come out thanks to the meditation and removing them will further your meditation progress. If you are sloppy and inconsistent, cheating here and there, hardly you see any hindrance - when lust arises, one risks of giving up training, if he doesn't see what it is.
Afflictions are the underlying tendencies. In case of first jhāna, there will be afflictions what try to entice you to lower world and if you want to get rid of them, for that you need move to the higher jhāna by cultivating drawbacks of vitakkavicāra(vacīsaṅkhāra's).
If you desire to get rebirth in heaven, then your destination(gāti) is either an animal womb or hell realm because of that wrong view. I suppose it is because of not understand these states arise from developing the mind, getting rid of defilements and then you qualify which means if you remove defilement then you are determined to attain jhāna or if you already have jhāna then the 2nd jhāna.Pulsar wrote: ↑Sun Jul 25, 2021 11:59 am A deluded person cannot engage in Jhana.
Right label for that kind of meditation is wrong meditation, or wrong jhana, or garbage. I would place suttas such as AN 9.41, alongside DN 22 and MN 111.
These suttas are nails in the coffin of Dhamma, that is all I have to say about this garbage.
In short, the factor what gets you to the jhāna needs become cultivateable by mind getting eager for it.
I suggest you to study Suttas and Commentaries and Third parties before you start calling them fake or you also can jsut put those aside for later after you have made more progress in your meditations.
Re: Jhana
Auto wrote
that writes nonsense like "formless is better than form and cessation is better than formlessness" without identifying what the heck is meant by that formlessness.
Inclusion of stuff like this in the Iti section of Sutta Pitaka (who did that?)
mislead many.
The agenda to push teachings into the canon that Buddha rejected???
Another instance when formlessness is mentioned in Sn 4.11, the Theravada abhidhamma interprets it as
formlessness of the arpupasamapattis.
Truth is, it is 4th jhana that Sn 4.11 is referring to, and not to Arupasamapattis. The Theravada abhidhamma made a grave mistake here.
Kinda tragic, don't you think? to mislead the earnest Buddhist?
Auto continued
Thank you for the largeness of your heart.
With love
thank you for the brilliant advice, you are just a day too late, since I've already done so.I suggest you to study Suttas
you mean Auto commentary? Can't you see I am forced to read them here?and Commentaries
can you identify the third party? Do you mean commentaries by those who are brainwashed by Upanisad, Jain type gymnastics, like Alara Kalama and Uddaka Ramaputta'sand Third parties
that writes nonsense like "formless is better than form and cessation is better than formlessness" without identifying what the heck is meant by that formlessness.
Inclusion of stuff like this in the Iti section of Sutta Pitaka (who did that?)
mislead many.
The agenda to push teachings into the canon that Buddha rejected???
Another instance when formlessness is mentioned in Sn 4.11, the Theravada abhidhamma interprets it as
formlessness of the arpupasamapattis.
Truth is, it is 4th jhana that Sn 4.11 is referring to, and not to Arupasamapattis. The Theravada abhidhamma made a grave mistake here.
Kinda tragic, don't you think? to mislead the earnest Buddhist?
Auto continued
When I make more progress I shall consult you my Dearest Auto. Pl stick around.before you start calling them fake or you also can jsut put those aside for later after you have made more progress in your meditations.
Thank you for the largeness of your heart.
With love
Re: Jhana
My Dearest Auto: with your great insight can you help me understand Iti 73.
To me it is more puzzling than MN 111, where words were fed into the mouth of Buddha, classically.
Here are the lines from Iti 73.
How would you interpret the words in italics?
With love
To me it is more puzzling than MN 111, where words were fed into the mouth of Buddha, classically.
Here are the lines from Iti 73.
How would you interpret the words in italics?
Thank you Auto for your time.“Mendicants, formless states are more peaceful than states of form; cessation is more peaceful than formless states.”
That is what the Buddha said. On this it is said:
“There are beings in the realm of luminous form,
and others established in the formless.
Not understanding cessation,
they return in future lives.
But those who completely understand sensual pleasures,
not stuck in the formless,
those who are released in cessation,
they are destroyers of death.
Having directly experienced the deathless element,
free of attachments;
having realised relinquishment
of attachments, the undefiled
fully awakened Buddha teaches
the sorrowless, stainless state.”
This too was spoken by the Blessed One: that is what I heard.
With love
Re: Jhana
There is nothing anti-scriptural about what I am writing.
Auto wrote
Fake suttas such as MN 111, and DN 22 belong to the propaganda machine. What did V. Sujato call DN 22? Short memory, right?
This is a public forum, I merely asked you to explain a sutta in the itivuttaka for me. What is anti about it?
You know that I am not anti Buddha, right? If I am so, what am I doing here?
Why would I disparage the one person who enabled me to diminish my suffering?
Let us not avoid the subject, let us not try to create a distraction by name calling. I only asked you to clarify Iti 73, for me.
I cannot find a Chinese parallel for it. Could it have been composed lately by Theravadin abhidhammikas, and placed in the sutta pitaka, just like DN 22 found its place there.
If you find it hard to handle Iti 73, pl explain how DN 22 makes sense to you?
If that is too much, pl. explain Iti 44 that speaks of two Nibbanas.
Two nibbanas to me, are reminiscent of Moksa in the Upanisads.
Strangely Iti 44, does not have a Chinese parallel, and the content of Iti 44 goes against the core teachings of the Buddha.
Auto continued:
Prove to me you are worth following by explaining the two questionable suttas in Itivutattaka?
With love
I just noticed this, Auto also wrote in a later comment:
Auto wrote
Have you read the many scriptures I have quoted on this thread, which lead me to understand what the Buddha taught, not the writings of the propaganda machine, promoting the Arupasamapattis.anti-scriptural propaganda gets old.
Fake suttas such as MN 111, and DN 22 belong to the propaganda machine. What did V. Sujato call DN 22? Short memory, right?
This is a public forum, I merely asked you to explain a sutta in the itivuttaka for me. What is anti about it?
You know that I am not anti Buddha, right? If I am so, what am I doing here?
Why would I disparage the one person who enabled me to diminish my suffering?
Let us not avoid the subject, let us not try to create a distraction by name calling. I only asked you to clarify Iti 73, for me.
I cannot find a Chinese parallel for it. Could it have been composed lately by Theravadin abhidhammikas, and placed in the sutta pitaka, just like DN 22 found its place there.
If you find it hard to handle Iti 73, pl explain how DN 22 makes sense to you?
If that is too much, pl. explain Iti 44 that speaks of two Nibbanas.
Two nibbanas to me, are reminiscent of Moksa in the Upanisads.
Strangely Iti 44, does not have a Chinese parallel, and the content of Iti 44 goes against the core teachings of the Buddha.
Auto continued:
Do you mean I should follow you for a long time?And if you want to know something then you need follow someone a long time.
Prove to me you are worth following by explaining the two questionable suttas in Itivutattaka?
With love
I just noticed this, Auto also wrote in a later comment:
I hope so too, who wants to live with residues of idiocy. Once you convince me of the veracity of Iti 44 and Iti 73, who knows???First you need get rid of your idiotic scepticism, i hope it doesn't take long for you.
Re: Jhana
you quoted Sutta sn22.55 previously,
It says consciousness is supported by form, feeling, perception, and fabrications and that there is no other way possible to describe the arising and passing away, growing etc of that consciousness apart from those.
Without those supports, consciousness is tentatively unmoving, not possible to detect, anidassam(invisible) yet it is a property(dhātu) for consciousness to arise, grow in the future.https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN22_55.html wrote:“Should consciousness, when standing, stand attached to form, supported by form (as its object), landing on form, watered with delight, it would exhibit growth, increase, & proliferation.
“Should consciousness, when standing, stand attached to feeling, supported by feeling (as its object), landing on feeling, watered with delight, it would exhibit growth, increase, & proliferation.
“Should consciousness, when standing, stand attached to perception, supported by perception (as its object), landing on perception, watered with delight, it would exhibit growth, increase, & proliferation.
“Should consciousness, when standing, stand attached to fabrications, supported by fabrications (as its object), landing on fabrications, watered with delight, it would exhibit growth, increase, & proliferation.
“Were someone to say, ‘I will describe a coming, a going, a passing away, an arising, a growth, an increase, or a proliferation of consciousness apart from form, from feeling, from perception, from fabrications,’ that would be impossible.
Therefore āyatana(formless states) are used to develop that consciousness(detected with a wisdom eye) in order to give up passion for the consciousness property for stilling of said consciousness that it wouldn't grow in the future and thus rebirth is ended.
See the consciousness-property in the below quote,
The formless states are more peaceful, but not totally. Read your quote from Iti 73,https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN22_55.html wrote: “If a monk abandons passion for the property of form.…
..
“If a monk abandons passion for the property of fabrications.…
“If a monk abandons passion for the property of consciousness, then owing to the abandonment of passion, the support is cut off, and there is no landing of consciousness. Consciousness, thus not having landed, not increasing, not concocting, is released. Owing to release, it is steady. Owing to steadiness, it is contented. Owing to contentment, it is not agitated. Not agitated, he (the monk) is totally unbound right within. He discerns that ‘Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.’
i'm just repeating the word future. That in meditation we got to use the same brain part what is used for thinking things ahead, for like locking the door so to prevent unnecessary guests from entering inside the house.Iti73 wrote:Not understanding cessation,
they return in future lives.
Re: Jhana
Form arises accordingly to the past actions and once you enter the jhāna - mind fixates on the object(without any signs), the form what belongs to the sensuous realm is already there, it doesn't arise.Pulsar wrote: ↑Wed Jul 21, 2021 9:56 pmIf you disengage from form, rest of DO cannot come into play, vinnana cannot have a pot to piss in.
- it only comes to growth if there is a sprinkling of delight
Also know that form arises only if it is fed, that does not mean spaghetti, rice and black beans.
If you withhold the food, what happens to forms that arise in mind? they collapse.
The difference between sense organ object and 'here and now' object is that the object in the 'here and now' belongs to the sensuous realm. Rūpa-jhāna is not objectless, it just doesn't have rūpa in terms of belonging.