The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

A forum for Dhamma resources in languages other than English
User avatar
S. Johann
Posts: 202
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2021 3:03 pm
Location: Aural, Kampuchea
Contact:

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by S. Johann »

It's not perfect english, good householder, but given, and maybe good householder likes to investigate the teaching in detail, looking within and share talented translation and detail explaining of the cause of Avijja and the cause of Vijja: Avijjāsuttaṁ (AN, Yamakavaggo, 1. Sutta)

Much merits, till even going forth on it, surrender.
Bhikkhus, a beginning to ignorance cannot be pointed out, 'Before this there was no ignorance, it occured afterwards. Bhikkhus, it is pointed out: On account of this, there is ignorance.

Bhikkhus, I say, ignorance too has a supportive condition. What is the supportive condition of ignorance? ...
You may make use of this account as wished for good, it's a cast off one. Password: 12345678. As the good stuff gets usually censured here, good if being quick to find ways out.
Lal
Posts: 949
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2016 11:39 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by Lal »

There are many ways to describe avijja or any other concept. I just don't have time to explore the reference that you cited.
- However, they all provide the same understanding.
- One needs to realize that as long as there is existence in this world of 31 realms, there will be suffering.
- The only way to stop suffering in the rebirth process is to stop that process.
- That is also the essence of the Paṭhamabodhi Sutta (Ud 1.1) and Dutiyabodhi Sutta (Ud 1.2) discussed in the following post: "Distortion of Pāli Keywords in Paṭicca Samuppāda" posted on Nov 28, 2021:viewtopic.php?f=46&t=26749&start=1410. That is the post that I would like Ontheway and other commentators like him to reply to.

P.S. The following reference is somewhat like the one you cited:"Transcendental Dependent Arising": https://accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors ... el277.html

I see that you have made another comment in the meantime. No. I am not stingy. I just have limited time. I wish I had an infinite time at my disposal.
Last edited by Lal on Mon Dec 27, 2021 2:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
S. Johann
Posts: 202
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2021 3:03 pm
Location: Aural, Kampuchea
Contact:

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by S. Johann »

No time... stingy? Amacchariaya is a notion of great being, especially in regard of not stingy in regard of Dhamma.

Or an excuse? Why not willing to try to get in relation/association with Sublime? Byāpāda, fear of losing stand/house? That the tower of sankharas may collaps, is not firm maintaining the home/stand, good householder Lal?

What's the use of playing around with saññas (words), wishing them to be real? Profil-ation, papanca? Wouldn't coming to Saddha, surrender, not of more and lasting benefit?
Last edited by S. Johann on Mon Dec 27, 2021 2:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
You may make use of this account as wished for good, it's a cast off one. Password: 12345678. As the good stuff gets usually censured here, good if being quick to find ways out.
User avatar
S. Johann
Posts: 202
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2021 3:03 pm
Location: Aural, Kampuchea
Contact:

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by S. Johann »

“I do not teach ānāpānassati to those who do not know where to establish sati (muṭṭhassatissa) and not know how to sort out “san or defilements” (asampajānassa)..."
E Nȯȯ...(see?!)! What does that mean in relation with the lokuttara paṭiccasamuppāda approach within the Avijja Sutta, good householder Lal. Whould one establishing steady mindfulness on Saññas, be fit for Anapana? Or would they propably just increase there wrong view? Does one, holding meanings, holding on perceptions of words, seems to be fit to sort out defilements?
...Lack of mindful awareness is the reply. Bhikkhus, I say, even the lack of mindful awareness has a supportive condition. What is the supportive condition for the lack of mindful awareness? Unwise attention (attention not directed on what gives birth) is the reply.

Bhikkhus, I say, even unwise attention has a supportive condition. What is the supportive condition for unwise attention? Lack of faith (surrender) is the reply Bhikkhus, I say, even lack of faith has a supportive condition. What is the supportive condition for lack of faith? Listening to the incorrect Teaching (not pointing out cause and effect) is the reply. Bhikkhus, I say, even listening to the incorrect Teaching has a supportive condition. What is the supportive condition for listening to the incorrect Teaching? Associating non- Great beings (not taking jati/stand/relation under the Gems but outside) is the reply.
You may make use of this account as wished for good, it's a cast off one. Password: 12345678. As the good stuff gets usually censured here, good if being quick to find ways out.
User avatar
S. Johann
Posts: 202
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2021 3:03 pm
Location: Aural, Kampuchea
Contact:

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by S. Johann »

Lal wrote: Mon Dec 27, 2021 1:49 pm

I see that you have made another comment in the meantime. No. I am not stingy. I just have limited time. I wish I had an infinite time at my disposal.
That's exactly the reason why some would like good householder Lal to do not waste time. Once left stand/house, time would't matter anymore: hence no more macchariya, once on the lane. Time's really running! Not done whats ones, one would really has reason to grief. But here is Okasa, yet to surrender to it, has a cause, is not without a condition, good householder. What's the condition for taking on given Okasa for good birth, association, good Lal?

What are the hindrances, possible, and accurate? Doubt? Fear of losing stand? Lazyness? Sense-desires? Restlessness, remorse?

Improper at-tension/attracted?

What ever effort and time in "my disposal" to maintain, wouldn't prevent it from fail. Yet, how much time/space (okasa) takes it to go beyound, right here?
You may make use of this account as wished for good, it's a cast off one. Password: 12345678. As the good stuff gets usually censured here, good if being quick to find ways out.
Lal
Posts: 949
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2016 11:39 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by Lal »

Rebirths Take Place According to Abhisaṅkhāra

Rebirths take place according to abhisaṅkhāra cultivated. That mechanism is explained in Akusala-mula Paticca Samuppāda.

Three Types of Abhisaṅkhāra Leading to Rebirth in the 31 Realms

1. As we have discussed, the 31 realms in this world (loka) are distributed among three levels: kāma loka, rupa loka, and arupa loka.
Kāma loka has 11 realms: the four lowest realms (apāyās,) the human realm, and the six Deva realms.
Rupa loka consists of the sixteen rupāvacara Brahma realms.
Arupa loka has four arupāvacara Brahma realms.

In previous posts, we saw that three types of abhisaṅkhāra are generated with the Akusala-mula Paticca Samuppāda process that leads to rebirths among the 31 realms. See, #8 of “Saṅkhāra – Should Not be Translated as a Single Word.”

2. Those three types of abhisaṅkhāra lead to rebirths among the 31 realms as follows:

- The worst type, apuññābhisaṅkhāra, lead to rebirths in the four lowest realms.
- The next higher level of puññābhisaṅkhāra leads to rebirths in the higher seven realms in the kāma loka and the 16 realms in the rupa loka.
- The best type of āneñjābhisaṅkhāra lead to rebirths in the highest four realms of this world belonging to the arupa loka.

Akusala-Mula Paṭicca Samuppāda Dictates the Rebirth Process

3. The Akusala-Mula Paṭicca Samuppāda describes how rebirths (jāti) take place in this world starting with “avijjā paccayā (abhi)saṅkhāra” step.

- As we discussed, saṅkhāra in the step “avijjā paccayā saṅkhāra” refers to “abhisaṅkhāra.” “Paṭiccasamuppāda Vibhaṅga” (https://suttacentral.net/vb6/pli/ms?lay ... ript=latin) explains the step “avijjā paccayā saṅkhāra” as, “Tattha katame avijjā paccayā saṅkhārā? Puññābhisaṅkhāro, apuññābhisaṅkhāro, āneñjābhisaṅkhāro.”

Translated: “What is meant by ‘avijjā paccayā saṅkhārā?’ That means puññābhisaṅkhāra, apuññābhisaṅkhāra, āneñjābhisaṅkhāra.” For details, see “Sankhāra – What It Really Means.”

- Such abhisaṅkhāra can be kāya, vaci, or mano saṅkhāra that we discussed above. But only a part of kāya, vaci, and mano saṅkhāra are abhisaṅkhāra.
- In other words, abhisaṅkhāra leads to kamma done with lobha, dosa, moha, and mundane versions of alobha, adosa, amoha.
- They are akusala kamma or dasa akusala (three with the body, four with speech, and three with the mind). They can be kāya kamma, vaci kamma, and mano kamma. See, “Ten Immoral Actions (Dasa Akusala)."

Apuññābhisaṅkhāra – Connection to Lobha, Dosa, moha

4. Apuññābhisaṅkhāra (“worst abhisaṅkhāra“) can lead to rebirths in the four lower realms (apāyās.) Such “bad abhisaṅkhāra“ arise due to lobha, dosa, moha (and other related cetasika like jealousy.)

- Such apuññābhisaṅkhāra (“apuñña abhisaṅkhāra”) lead to apuñña kamma (or “pāpa kamma.“) That is the worst form of akusala kamma based on lobha (greed), dosa (hate/anger), moha (worst than avijjā).

5. “Paṭiccasamuppāda Vibhaṅga” explains apuññābhisaṅkhāra as follows: “Tattha katamo apuññābhisaṅkhāro? Akusalā cetanā kāmāvacarā—ayaṁ vuccati “apuññābhisaṅkhāro” OR “apuññābhisaṅkhāra are akusala cetanā associated with the kāma loka.”

- Akusala cetanā (ot intention of doing an akusala kamma) is in “akusala citta” or “defiled thoughts.”

Puññābhisaṅkhāra and Āneñjābhisaṅkhāra – Connection to (Mundane) Alobha, Adosa, Amoha

6. Then there are two types of “good saṅkhāra” that lead to rebirths in the higher 27 realms. Those “relatively good” abhisaṅkhāra lead to rebirths in the “good realms” at or above the human realm. Those are puññābhisaṅkhāra and āneñjābhisaṅkhāra. Those two categories arise based on the mundane versions of alobha, adosa, moha (i.e., without comprehension of the Four Noble Truths/Tilakkhana/Paṭicca Samuppāda.)

- Puñña kamma with puññābhisaṅkhāra can bring “good results” in this world, including rebirths in the human realm and the six Deva realms. Giving, moral living, and meditation come under puñña kamma; see, “Puñña Kamma – Dāna, Sīla, Bhāvanā.”
- Puññābhisaṅkhāra also includes cultivation of rupāvacara jhāna (first four jhāna) that lead to rebirths in the 16 rupāvacara Brahma realms.
- Āneñjābhisaṅkhāra comes into play in the cultivation of the four higher (arupāvacara) jhānās that lead to rebirths in the four arupāvacara Brahma realms.
- Akusala kamma is any kamma that keeps one in the rebirth process. Thus, puñña kamma done without comprehension of the Four Noble Truths/Tilakkhana/Paṭicca Samuppāda belong to akusala kamma. That is why puññābhisaṅkhāra and āneñjābhisaṅkhāra also arise due to avijjā.

Three Levels of Abhisaṅkhāra

7. Therefore, now we have an easy way to remember what types of abhisaṅkhāra lead to rebirths among the 31 realms in this world. To summarize:

- Worst form of akusala kamma are apuñña kamma or pāpa kamma. They are done with apuñña abhisaṅkhāra (apuññābhisaṅkhāra) and lead to the rebirths in the lowest four realms. Those four realms are collectively called apāyās and deliver the worst forms of suffering.
- The next (higher) level of abhisaṅkhāra are puññā abhisankahara (puññābhisaṅkhāra.) Punna kamma (like giving to charity, taking care of parents/elders/bhikkhus, etc) lead to rebirths in the human realm and the six Deva realms. There is a higher level of puññābhisaṅkhāra that leads to rebirths in the 16 rupāvacara Brahma realms; those involve the cultivation of rupāvacara jhāna. Thus, puññābhisaṅkhāra lead to rebirths in 23 realms.
- The highest level of abhisaṅkhāra is āneñja abhisaṅkhāra (āneñjābhisaṅkhāra.)Those involved the cultivation of the four highest jhāna, the arupāvacara jhāna. They, of course, lead to rebirths in the four arupāvacara Brahma realms.
Thus we can now clearly see how the rebirth process takes place among the 31 realms according to the types of abhisaṅkhāra cultivated via “avijjā paccayā saṅkhāra.”

All Types of Abhisaṅkhāra Arise Due to Avijjā!

8. As explained in #1 above, all types of abhisaṅkhāra within the three categories arise due to avijjā. What is avijjā?

- “Paṭiccasamuppāda Vibhaṅga” explains avijjā as follows: “Tattha katamā avijjā? Dukkhe aññāṇaṁ, dukkhasamudaye aññāṇaṁ, dukkhanirodhe aññāṇaṁ, dukkhanirodhagāminiyā paṭipadāya aññāṇaṁ—ayaṁ vuccati “avijjā”.

Translated: “What is avijjā? It is the ignorance of the Four Nobel Truths or the absence of four types of knowledge (ñāṇa): absence of knowledge about the Truths on suffering (Dukkhe aññāṇaṁ), the origin of suffering (dukkha samudaye aññāṇaṁ), cessation of suffering (dukkha nirodhe aññāṇaṁ), and the way to reach the cessation of suffering (dukkha nirodha gāminiyā paṭipadāya aññāṇaṁ.)

- As we saw above, starting with the “avijjā paccayā saṅkhāra” step in Akusala-mula PS different types of existences (bhava) and corresponding rebirths (jāti) arise among the 31 realms.

Connection to Tilakkhana and Paṭicca Samuppāda

9. The key here is to understand the First Noble Truth. In other words, instead of “dukkhe aññāṇaṁ” (not comprehending the Noble Truth on Suffering) to get to “dukkhe ñāṇaṁ” (knowledge of the Noble Truth on Suffering.)

- What is dukkha (suffering)? It is not the relatively minor sufferings that we experience in this life. Most people are happy with their lives.
- To understand the REAL suffering, one must understand the “wider worldview” seen by the Buddha upon his Enlightenment. He saw that most living beings are trapped in the four lowest realms for very long times. That is the suffering referred to by the Buddha!
- Even though relatively reduced levels of suffering manifest in the higher realms at or above the human realm, ANY given sentient-being spends most time in the apāyās.
- More details at, “Paṭicca Samuppāda, Tilakkhana, Four Noble Truths.”: https://puredhamma.net/paticca-samuppad ... le-truths/

Apuññābhisaṅkhāra Done With Moha or Avijjā

10. The worst form of apuññābhisaṅkhāra is done with the worst form avijjā of moha. One may FREQUENTLY act with moha if one still has one or more of the ten types of micchā diṭṭhi.

- With the removal of the ten types of micchā diṭṭhi the tendency to act with moha and generate apuññābhisaṅkhāra will be reduced.
- But as long as one has not comprehended the Four Noble Truths/Tilakkhana/Paticca Samuppāda, one may act with avijjā and may generate abhisaṅkhāra of all three types.
- As we saw above, Paticca Samuppāda clearly explains how different types of rebirths arise due to avijja. That is why it is critical to understand that process.

Cultivation of Anariya Jhāna Done With Avijjā

11. We can clearly see now that the cultivation of all types of anariya jhāna is done with avijjā (anariya means "non-Buddhist). Such anariya jhāna are cultivated using anariya meditation techniques such as kasina mediation (using kasina objects) and breath meditation (which is NOT Ānapānasati meditation.) The sole purpose of such efforts is to attain such jhānās, and NOT Nibbāna. Cultivation of such jhāna leads to rebirths in the Brahma realms, as we saw above.

- Any effort to seek a rebirth anywhere in the 31 realms is done with avijjā because ANY such existence will have a finite lifetime.
- When that existence in such Brahma realm comes to an end, rebirths in lower realms will take place, inevitably ending up in the apāyās. That is why such efforts will NOT lead to the ending of saṁsāric suffering.
- The only way to stop future suffering is to stop the rebirth process.
- Thus, we can see that another way to describe avijjā is as follows: As long as one has the mindset that “existence ANYWHERE among the 31 realms is beneficial,” one would have avijjā. That is why the cultivation of (anariya) jhāna is done with avijjā!

12. Note that Ariya jhāna is NOT cultivated with the goal of getting a rebirth in a Brahma realm. Ariya jhānās are realized automatically by some people with magga phala (if one has cultivated anariya jhānās in recent past lives.)

- But some Arahants have cultivated Ariya jhāna deliberately and the Buddha had recommended that too. A good example is Ven. Moggalana. After the cultivation of such jhānās, he developed abhiññā powers. Then he frequently visited Deva and Brahma realms to teach Dhamma to those Devas and Brahmas.
- By the way, there is a series of suttas that describe how Ven. Moggalana attained all jhānās in sequence. That series starts with the “Paṭhamajhānapañhā Sutta (SN 40.1).” (https://suttacentral.net/sn40.1/pli/ms? ... ript=latin) Those who have questions about the terms vitakka/vicāra, avitakka/avicāra, and savitakka/savicāra should read that series of suttas.
auto
Posts: 4579
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by auto »

Lal wrote: Tue Dec 28, 2021 12:45 pm - Such abhisaṅkhāra can be kāya, vaci, or mano saṅkhāra that we discussed above. But only a part of kāya, vaci, and mano saṅkhāra are abhisaṅkhāra.
- In other words, abhisaṅkhāra leads to kamma done with lobha, dosa, moha, and mundane versions of alobha, adosa, amoha.
- They are akusala kamma or dasa akusala (three with the body, four with speech, and three with the mind). They can be kāya kamma, vaci kamma, and mano kamma. See, “Ten Immoral Actions (Dasa Akusala)."
Sankhara in paticcasamuppada is cetana and is kamma. Body, voice, mentality are conditioned phenomena(sankhata) conditioned by sankhara.
Body, voice, mentality gives rise to the citta what is rooted in lobha, dosa and moha and if it produces rebirth then the citta were good, just as eye is good if one sees.
Person can be wholly bad without any good in them, but if there can rebirth happen then that person still has kusala root.
Lal wrote: Tue Dec 28, 2021 12:45 pm 4. Apuññābhisaṅkhāra (“worst abhisaṅkhāra“) can lead to rebirths in the four lower realms (apāyās.) Such “bad abhisaṅkhāra“ arise due to lobha, dosa, moha (and other related cetasika like jealousy.)
apaya means one is stuck with one and same citta producing pleasure, sadness and equanimity the entire cycle or kappa thus it is in its entirety a bad state of existence because of the ending of kappa is what gives rebirth.
findinglostvalues
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2021 4:47 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by findinglostvalues »

Lal wrote: Sat Dec 25, 2021 5:04 pm Thanks for the comments, findinglostvalues.

This is the way I write because it is based on my experience. It is not speculation.
- I don't understand why one needs to be "humble". That could be the case if one is not confident about the subject matter. I don't need to apologize for the way I write. One has to write with confidence.
- I realize that for most people Buddha Dhamma is like philosophy. Everyone can have their opinions.
- My writings are not my opinions. They are fully compatible with the Tipitaka, and thus the teachings of the Buddha. I may make minor mistakes, but I am confident about the key concepts.

Of course, it is up to each person to evaluate my writings and see whether they make sense. No one is forcing anyone to read my posts.
- Some people get upset because what I write is not compatible with their worldview. They don't realize that the Buddha just after Enlightenment himself realized that his new-found knowledge would be difficult to be explained to most people.

If I don't take a forceful stand, no one will notice. Even after all these writings, I do not see ANYONE openly challenging "the establishment", for example, those who (mis)translate suttas at Sutta Central.
- If you have read enough of my posts, you would have noticed that I have given many examples of wrong translations at Sutta Central. Have you asked those translators to respond? Of course, Sutta Central is just a part of "the establishment" that I referred to above. Most English books today have the same wrong translations.
- Instead, there are a few who make derogatory comments to me, WITHOUT presenting any valid arguments. It is a waste of time to respond to such comments. For example, the comment by auto just above yours is totally nonsensical. My writings on vitakka, vicara are not inconsistent with most of the writings of Narada Mahathera that auto cited. He just does not understand my writings or Ven. Narada's. Vitakka and vicara are two cetasika that can arise in both good and bad thoughts. When they arise in bad thoughts, they are mostly referred to as just "vitakka/vicara." But vitakka/vicara that arise in good cittas (especially in jhana cittas) are referred to as "savitakka/savicara" specifically to point out the "good'.

You asked: " Why can't you present all of this without asserting an agenda of a 'pure dhamma'?"
- I present it as 'pure dhamma' because it is. Why don't you ask those other translators to point out any contradictions with my 'pure dhamma' with the Tipitaka. I do understand that most people are unable to make a judgment as to whose translations are correct. But I have pointed out SO MANY inconsistencies with the translations at Sutta Central that can be evaluated without any knowledge of Pali. For example, please read my post, "Saṅkhāra – Should Not be Translated as a Single Word" (on Dec 06, 2021) above which provided clear evidence of the mistranslation of the Pali word 'sankhara." If you (or anyone else) can find "a hole" in my argument, please point that out.
- They also mistranslate vinnana, and many other concepts, as I have pointed out in many posts.

I believe you should be asking questions from those translators!
Perhaps you have certain connotations and perceptions about "humility" that makes you aversive to it? As for needing to be humble, one doesn't need to be humble just like one doesn't need to take on the precepts/sila, but it does seem like humility is a result of and characteristic of practice of the dhamma and following the path. It is directly mentioned in these:
Maha-mangala Sutta

Code: Select all

"Respect, humility,
contentment, gratitude,
hearing the Dhamma on timely occasions:
	This is the highest protection."

Saddha Sutta

Code: Select all

So with the person consummate
in virtue & conviction,
humble, sensitive, gentle,
	delightful, & mild:
To him come those without effluent —
	free from passion,
	free from aversion,
	free from delusion —
the field of merit for the world.

They teach him the Dhamma
	that dispels all stress.
And when he understands,
	he is freed from effluents,

	totally unbound.


Anuruddha Sutta- Eight thoughts of a Great Person

Code: Select all

...As he was sitting there the Blessed One said to him, “Good, Anuruddha, very good. It’s good that you think these thoughts of a great person:
 ‘This Dhamma is for one who is modest, not for one who is self-aggrandizing.
  This Dhamma is for one who is content, not for one who is discontent.
  This Dhamma is for one who is reclusive, not for one who is entangled. 
  This Dhamma is for one whose persistence is aroused, not for one who is lazy. 
  This Dhamma is for one whose mindfulness is established, not for one whose mindfulness is confused. 
  This Dhamma is for one whose mind is concentrated, not for one whose mind is unconcentrated. 
  This Dhamma is for one endowed with discernment, not for one whose discernment is weak.’ 
  Now then, Anuruddha, think the eighth thought of a great person: 
  ‘This Dhamma is for one who enjoys non-objectification,1 who delights in non-objectification, not for one who enjoys & delights in objectification.’


Also, could you without linking me to an article, simply tell me what is the correct/direct translation/meaning of anicca, dukkha, anatta? You don't need to justify why it is so, but state the correct meaning according to you.

Furthermore, you have said gati is what determines one's rebirth and used "dog gati" as an example; what in your view are "dog gati"? Can you explain how that relates to your recent post about rebirth and Abhisaṅkhāra?
Lal
Posts: 949
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2016 11:39 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by Lal »

1. Here is something I am trying to wrap my mind around, findinglostvalues.

I am saying: "Look, these people at Sutta Central (and other places) are saying 2 plus 3 is 6. That is obviously wrong."

- Instead of asking me questions about that, and more importantly, asking those people at Sutta Central "Is he wrong saying that? Can you explain why he is wrong?" you are asking me to be humble when pointing such obvious contradictions. What has the humility to do with this? It is an obvious contradiction! Even a child can see that.

2. findinglostvalues asks: "Also, could you without linking me to an article, simply tell me what is the correct/direct translation/meaning of anicca, dukkha, anatta?"

Am I also restricted to 10 words?
- You are so funny. You want me to explain things to you in a few sentences and be humble about it too. Any other requirements?
- These are deep concepts that REQUIRE a lot of reading of basic concepts.
- I guess you are looking for a simple translation just like "anicca" as "impermanence"? I have analyzed the stupidity of such translations. But those analyses would be too long for you.

Regarding my point #1 above: The following is from the post I made on Dec 27, 2021, 5:14 am in response to a comment by Ontheway that day.
"I just picked two suttas to prove my point in the following post: "Distortion of Pāli Keywords in Paṭicca Samuppāda" posted on Nov 28, 2021: viewtopic.php?f=46&t=26749&start=1410
- Even a child should be able to see the CONTRADICTIONS evident in those two translations of the Paṭhamabodhi Sutta (Ud 1.1) and Dutiyabodhi Sutta (Ud 1.2).

Instead of making empty comments, why don't you PROVE my arguments are not valid? That will be the easy solution to this back and forth.
- Quote from my essay and present valid arguments against them. So, I am guessing he cannot find anything wrong with my essay.

Unless that is done by you or any others making empty comments, I will not reply to such empty comments."
So far Ontheway has not responded. If you can read a post that long, you can take a look at it too.
findinglostvalues
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2021 4:47 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by findinglostvalues »

Lal wrote: Wed Dec 29, 2021 12:37 am 1. Here is something I am trying to wrap my mind around, findinglostvalues.

I am saying: "Look, these people at Sutta Central (and other places) are saying 2 plus 3 is 6. That is obviously wrong."

- Instead of asking me questions about that, and more importantly, asking those people at Sutta Central "Is he wrong saying that? Can you explain why he is wrong?" you are asking me to be humble when pointing such obvious contradictions. What has the humility to do with this? It is an obvious contradiction! Even a child can see that.

2. findinglostvalues asks: "Also, could you without linking me to an article, simply tell me what is the correct/direct translation/meaning of anicca, dukkha, anatta?"

Am I also restricted to 10 words?
- You are so funny. You want me to explain things to you in a few sentences and be humble about it too. Any other requirements?
- These are deep concepts that REQUIRE a lot of reading of basic concepts.
- I guess you are looking for a simple translation just like "anicca" as "impermanence"? I have analyzed the stupidity of such translations. But those analyses would be too long for you.

Regarding my point #1 above: The following is from the post I made on Dec 27, 2021, 5:14 am in response to a comment by Ontheway that day.
"I just picked two suttas to prove my point in the following post: "Distortion of Pāli Keywords in Paṭicca Samuppāda" posted on Nov 28, 2021: viewtopic.php?f=46&t=26749&start=1410
- Even a child should be able to see the CONTRADICTIONS evident in those two translations of the Paṭhamabodhi Sutta (Ud 1.1) and Dutiyabodhi Sutta (Ud 1.2).

Instead of making empty comments, why don't you PROVE my arguments are not valid? That will be the easy solution to this back and forth.
- Quote from my essay and present valid arguments against them. So, I am guessing he cannot find anything wrong with my essay.

Unless that is done by you or any others making empty comments, I will not reply to such empty comments."
So far Ontheway has not responded. If you can read a post that long, you can take a look at it too.

Hi Lal,
Happy New Year to you and your loved ones!
This post became longer than I wanted or expected because I was noting the questions that came up when trying to understand you, I hope you can bear with it.

Hmm well I was only answering your question as to why there is a need to be humble. Anyway, apologies for quoting suttas that you consider are wrong. In that case, where do you suggest I find proper translations that are credible? How would you translate the suttas I linked?

"Is he wrong saying that? Can you explain why he's wrong?" As for that, you never did respond to Venerable Dhammanando here: Or did you? If not, then why not? He seems to have done exactly what you are asking here, yet you don't seem to have responded?

I guess I didn't convey it correctly, anyway no worries, I am trying to understand you. I found an article of yours that details what anicca means according to you here.

I was very eager to understand about how gati relates to your post about abhisankhara dictating rebirth. Could you elaborate on that?

Few things I wanted to clarify:
"What we WOULD LIKE is to stay young, not get old, not get sick, and not to die ever. If we can have those conditions fulfilled we will be forever happy."
"If we can be born instantaneously at a young age (say, 15 to 25 years), and stay at that age without getting old or sick and never die, that is what we WOULD LIKE."

Wouldn't those conditions being fulfilled give rise to new conditions that will cause you suffering? For example, you'd outlive everyone you love and hold dear forever; this means not only are you unable to die but are unable to form meaningful relationships and love, without constantly having to lose them to time and age. It would be like hell and you'd go insane, as you can't die. After some point, you'd exhaust all possible things you could do in the human life as a new/enjoyable experience and that also will make you go insane as you've done everything you could, yet there is no meaning to any of it; you'd enter a worthless/meaningless 'eternal' existence. Would you even be able to attain nibbana in this case? You won't even be able to empathize with others' suffering because theirs is linked to eventual death and yours isn't, so chances of you succumbing to nihilism instead of Dhamma is very likely. In the above scenario, death is suffering not because you will die, but because you won't die and others will; birth is suffering because you are born into an existence without death, and although there is no rebirth, you'd wish you weren't born. You'd be trapped in a state of helpless suffering.

One being able to keep what one likes(nicca according to you)(healthy, never get old, sick or die) has led to MORE suffering; isn't that result contrary to what you say? Also isn't wanting to live forever stemming from lobha or bhava tanha, so how can you suggest fulfilling those conditions would lead to forever happiness when it is essentially an akusala kamma by essence arising out of one of the roots/mulas and would lead to suffering according to dhamma and as evident above?

One being able to keep what one likes has created different conditions that has led to the arising of new ways one is exposed to suffering. This is evident in normal mortal life as well; where we get something we'd like to keep the way we like, and we are able to keep it but at the expense of causing ourself, and others suffering. Why is that?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So far, I stuck to more or less one definition of anicca you have given, now I want to ask and clarify what you mean by anicca further.

You mention: "Thus “impermanence” is something that is inevitable; it is a property of anything in this world. But the perception of “anicca” is in someone’s mind"
"It is important to realize that nicca is the PERCEPTION that one can maintain things that one likes to one’s satisfaction."

Here you mentioned: "Why Are Tilakkhana so Important?
3. The Buddha clarified these “three characteristics of this world” in his very first sutta;"

Same one: Everyone Knows Anything in This World is Impermanent
11. Permanence and impermanence are inseparable PROPERTIES of living beings, objects, and events. On the other hand, nicca/anicca are PERCEPTIONS IN ONE’S MIND about them.

Also same article: Thus “impermanence” is inevitable; it is a property of anything in this world. But “anicca” is a perception in someone’s mind. That perception CAN be changed; that is how one gets rid of suffering.

In this article you mention
"Tilakkhana or the Three Characteristics of Nature encompasses those basic principles: anicca, dukkha, anatta."

Same article you say:"That is the anicca nature (inability to maintain rupa, vedanā, saññā, saṅkhāra, viññāna in the way one likes to)"

Taking the above quotes and what's in bold into account, which is it? Is anicca(as per your usage) a nature in the world/existence or a perception in one's mind? How can it be both a perception AND a nature, when perception is dependent on conditions?

Let's say it is a perception for the moment, and you did mention in one of the quotes that the perception can be changed. So then doesn't it imply that if anicca(inability to keep/maintain what we like the way we like) is a perception, then we can alter/change/remove that perception to achieve nicca(become able to keep/maintain what we like the way we like)? Or how exactly are you suggesting to change the perception?

You say impermanence is a property of anything in this world, doesn't that mean it's the nature of everything in this world? Then doesn't it have to be one of the Characteristics, Properties, or Natures that the Buddha mentioned?

You've said anicca nature is the inability to maintain rupa, vedana, etc. How is "inability" a nature? The subject of inability is us, because we are the ones UNABLE to maintain it due to a certain condition. So you could say anicca(according to your usage) is our nature, but how can you say it is the nature of the world? If you say it is of the world, then it would imply the world doesn't have the ability to maintain what it likes? How does that make sense?

Doesn't this suggest that "inability" isn't a nature but an effect/result/consequence that arises out of dependency on something else? And that something else would have to be something more 'concrete', like a property, characteristic, or nature that is inherent? What would that be?
Isn't the problem here the clinging, based on the mulas, to what is of a certain nature in existence that leads to suffering? Can you call that nature anicca and then ALSO call the clinging, anicca(as per your meaning) nature when it is us that engage in the clinging? Simply for the sake of the point, it's like saying Fire has the nature of burning(corresponds to anicca), but burning(corresponds to anicca) is also the nature of our inability to keep ourselves from burning while putting our hand in the fire.

This isn't the same as the usage of a word like "Right" in the English language, because the distinctions in the meanings are defined. Yet here, you haven't given a clear definition for the nature of anicca as per the world/existence, but have given a definition for your usage of anicca pertaining to us, which conflates clinging due to mulas with what is a nature of the world is without actually saying what the nature of the world is.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now I am interested in your clarifications of how and why your usage and definition of anicca changes(funny that given the definitions anicca is usually given).
I'll highlight your usage below:

This post originally had the title, “Anicca – Inability to Maintain Anything”
Now it is called: Anicca - the inability to keep what you like.

That is what anicca means: the inability to maintain things to our liking.
In the same article: "That is anicca. We cannot maintain things to our satisfaction in the long run" -

Nothing in this world can be maintained to one’s satisfaction (anicca) - Is this really true? Hasn't there been anything that made you feel satisfied?

No matter how hard we try, it is not possible to maintain ANYTHING to our satisfaction. It is the nature of “this world”: anicca

But “anicca” is a perception in someone’s mind.

Anicca is a profound concept with several meanings, and they are all related

which means “(this world is) anicca because we just keep going through the birth (arising)/ death (destruction) process

Anicca (pronounced “anichcha”) is a profound concept that has several meanings (impermanence is only a small part of it). We discussed one interpretation as “it is not possible to maintain anything in this world to one’s satisfaction”

The anicca nature means NOTHING in this world has real value

The adult will recognize the “anicca nature” of the chocolate: it can only bring happiness only for a few minutes!

That is “aniccaṃ khayaṭṭhena,” which means “anicca nature leads to one to the downside,” i.e., to do immoral acts and to end up experiencing unimaginable suffering (dukkha dukkha) in the apāyā. Thus anicca nature not only means that one cannot maintain things to one’s satisfaction in the long run but ALSO, it can lead to much suffering in the future. - This is very surprising to me. Are you saying that one doesn't do immoral acts due to the 3 mulas but due to the nature of the world? Then shouldn't we all be doing immoral acts all the time because that is the nature of the world and that we will never actually get out of doing immoral acts?

It is an illusion to believe that ANY object in this world will have the “nicca” nature. That there are things in this world that have real, lasting value. The reality is the opposite expressed by the word “anicca.” One meaning of “anicca” is that there is nothing in this world of value that can bring lasting happiness.

I will stop here since this covers your articles about Anicca itself in a sense as you've given.

You have referred to anicca as:
- An inability keep what one likes
- An inability to maintain what one likes
- An inability to maintain things to our satisfaction in the long run
- As a truth that nothing in this world can be maintained to our satisfaction
- An inability/impossibility to maintain anything to our satisfaction
- A nature of the world
- A perception of one's mind
- A profound concept
- A condition for the rebirth process
- A nature that nothing in this world has real value
- A nature that only brings happiness for a short time
- A nature that leads one to do immoral acts and end up in apaya
- There is nothing in this world that can bring lasting happiness


You can't say it's all of them, because many of them contradict each other. They vary in meaning vastly.
There is a difference between saying maintain and keep. Just like saying what one likes and one's satisfaction.
A nature and a perception, one cannot be both; a nature is inherent, a perception requires a perceiver. You could say it's a nature of humans to perceive the nature of the world as anicca(as per your usage), but then it needs clarification as to which definition of anicca from above. If for example you use the meaning "A nature of the world" it would make no sense at all; it would read, "It's a nature of humans to perceive the nature of the world as a nature of the world". Does any of this lead to clarity or does it lead to confusion?

So then, what is Anicca? If someone teaching you or telling you something cannot narrow down the meaning/definition of something what they are teaching/telling, then wouldn't your natural conclusion be that he/she doesn't understand it and aren't a good teacher?

You have mentioned that Dhamma needs to be self-consistent, and I agree. However self-consistency of a teaching requires integrity, and that requires the establishing of integral points that form that integrity. As Anicca is deemed an integral and important point to comprehend even by the Buddha, it requires a consistent meaning/definition, not vary in meaning at such a vast extent depending on context to fit in with the logic/rationalizations of that specific context; isn't that intellectual dishonesty? I hope you can clarify.
Lal
Posts: 949
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2016 11:39 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by Lal »

Hello, findinglostvalues,
Happy New Year to you and yours too.

The link that you provided from bhikkhu Dhammanando was posted on Apr 05, 2017.
- I have responded to those comments several times, and we had a few “back and forth.”
- Then he stopped responding to my questions and comments. You should scan through the posts since April 2017 and read them.

Now, regarding the rest of your post.

You have commented and asked questions on a variety of subjects. We need to finish one subject before we can move on to others.

As I wrote in my last response to you, I would like to settle simple questions first. As I mentioned, “Ontheway” (who has made derogatory comments to me) has not responded to my request. And I asked you to respond too. Furthermore, I hope bhikkhu Sujato or someone from Sutta Central will respond too. That should be the beginning discussion with anyone who would want to engage.

As I mentioned, when bhikkhu Dhammanando and I had some exchanges, they did not go anywhere, because there were many topics discussed. Of course, he stopped responding too.

So, if you are interested in a discussion, let us figure out what is meant by key Pali words vinnana, sankhara, etc. first.

In a recent post, "Distortion of Pāli Keywords in Paṭicca Samuppāda" posted on Nov 28, 2021 (viewtopic.php?t=26749&start=1410) I pointed out the need to understand those two words and others that are in the recitation of the Paticca Samuppada sequence.
- That post refers to two simple, short suttas.

My simple question to you:
Do you agree with those translations at Sutta Central?
- If you agree with those translations, how do you respond to the questions I raised? Please quote from my post and point out what is wrong with my statements.
ssasny
Posts: 379
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:03 pm

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by ssasny »

It seems some, if not much confusion about the Waharaka Thera/ Pure Dhamma definition of 'anicca' vs. a more traditional understanding is based on a conflating of the Pali word 'anicca' and the Pali word 'aniccha' (without desire).

In a recent paper this was discussed at some length:

"Some Waharaka Definitions

Waharaka Thera’s re-interpretations of Pali Buddhist terms are as numerous as his output has been prolific.
While it is impractical to discuss any significant amount of them in a brief paper such as this, two key terms are worth
highlighting first: anicca and anatta.
The Pali commentarial interpretation of anicca, based on the Theravada Abhidhamma tradition, can seem utterly objective, devoid of
any affective quality. It can beg the question “so what?” about things that are not grasped as ‘mine’.

Waharaka Thera not only asks this question but also invents a way out by declaring aniccha to be the correct term, originating from
na+iccha, supposedly meaning ‘not as one desires’. He finds support for this explanation in sabbasaṅ khāresu anicchāsaññā
(perception of dispassion for all preparations) in Girimānandasutta, even though the same sutta also mentions aniccasaññā
(perception of impermanence) as the first of ten perceptions to be developed. Since this new definition conflates anicca with
not-self, anatta has been given a new meaning as well: apparently the correct term there is anattha, originating from
na+attha, supposedly meaning ‘meaningless’ and identical to asāra (insubstantial).

In many other instances, Waharaka definitions do not appear to have any direct relation to conventional linguistics."

The entire paper can be found here:

https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/gnw6q
Lal
Posts: 949
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2016 11:39 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by Lal »

@ ssasny: I corresponded with the author of the article that you cited when the article was posted at the Sutta Central discussion forum. That forum doesn't allow me to respond. I asked him to come to this forum and defend his paper. He is refusing to do so.
findinglostvalues
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2021 4:47 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by findinglostvalues »

Lal wrote: Sat Jan 01, 2022 6:29 pm Hello, findinglostvalues,
Happy New Year to you and yours too.

The link that you provided from bhikkhu Dhammanando was posted on Apr 05, 2017.
- I have responded to those comments several times, and we had a few “back and forth.”
- Then he stopped responding to my questions and comments. You should scan through the posts since April 2017 and read them.

Now, regarding the rest of your post.

You have commented and asked questions on a variety of subjects. We need to finish one subject before we can move on to others.

As I wrote in my last response to you, I would like to settle simple questions first. As I mentioned, “Ontheway” (who has made derogatory comments to me) has not responded to my request. And I asked you to respond too. Furthermore, I hope bhikkhu Sujato or someone from Sutta Central will respond too. That should be the beginning discussion with anyone who would want to engage.

As I mentioned, when bhikkhu Dhammanando and I had some exchanges, they did not go anywhere, because there were many topics discussed. Of course, he stopped responding too.

So, if you are interested in a discussion, let us figure out what is meant by key Pali words vinnana, sankhara, etc. first.

In a recent post, "Distortion of Pāli Keywords in Paṭicca Samuppāda" posted on Nov 28, 2021 (viewtopic.php?t=26749&start=1410) I pointed out the need to understand those two words and others that are in the recitation of the Paticca Samuppada sequence.
- That post refers to two simple, short suttas.

My simple question to you:
Do you agree with those translations at Sutta Central?
- If you agree with those translations, how do you respond to the questions I raised? Please quote from my post and point out what is wrong with my statements.
Hi Lal,

You say that but you haven't addressed any of my questions or subjects and simply avoided all of it. Why is this? Actually I don't have many questions. I was merely asking questions about your reasoning/logic in your articles for anicca to come to a clarification, because you have asked for valid arguments based on your essays/articles so that is the approach I took. I have specifically stayed away from referencing any suttas due to your aversion towards it.

I neither agree nor disagree with Sutta Central translations because I never used them. So do not mistake my position or misrepresent my position. I have merely spoken about and for reasoning and logic, because my only concern is discernment.

I don't understand how "Ontheway's" post concerns me? As for derogatory comments, that's hypocritical given the passive aggression and condescension, at display in your response to me.


I will further clarify what I asked in my previous post.
Lal wrote: Mon Dec 27, 2021 9:14 am
- The following translation, that you quote, is correct:
"These two things, mendicants, lead to the decline and disappearance of the true teaching. What two? The words and phrases are misplaced, and the meaning is misinterpreted. When the words and phrases are misplaced, the meaning is misinterpreted. These two things lead to the decline and disappearance of the true teaching.

These two things lead to the continuation, persistence, and enduring of the true teaching. What two? The words and phrases are well organized, and the meaning is correctly interpreted. When the words and phrases are well organized, the meaning is correctly interpreted. These two things lead to the continuation, persistence, and enduring of the true teaching.”
It doesn't concern me what the source of the above sutta translation is since you have said it's correct. So given that, and honoring what is said in that sutta, I want to ask you to give me a well organized and correctly interpreted meaning of Anicca and your reasoning for it. I have already compiled your own meanings, and your own articles which is what I gave you a list of above, along with questioning of your reasoning. My main request has been to clarify that, and I am making that straightforward and clear now that, it is the main subject I am concerned about and it is the first subject I want to finish. I am not quoting any sutta and only quoting your posts, I am merely trying to ponder about your reasoning so I can come to an understanding and discernment.

Now I am interested in your clarifications of how and why your usage and definition of anicca changes(funny that given the definitions anicca is usually given).
I'll highlight your usage below:

This post originally had the title, “Anicca – Inability to Maintain Anything”
Now it is called: Anicca - the inability to keep what you like.

That is what anicca means: the inability to maintain things to our liking.
In the same article: "That is anicca. We cannot maintain things to our satisfaction in the long run" -

Nothing in this world can be maintained to one’s satisfaction (anicca) - Is this really true? Hasn't there been anything that made you feel satisfied?

No matter how hard we try, it is not possible to maintain ANYTHING to our satisfaction. It is the nature of “this world”: anicca

But “anicca” is a perception in someone’s mind.

Anicca is a profound concept with several meanings, and they are all related

which means “(this world is) anicca because we just keep going through the birth (arising)/ death (destruction) process

Anicca (pronounced “anichcha”) is a profound concept that has several meanings (impermanence is only a small part of it). We discussed one interpretation as “it is not possible to maintain anything in this world to one’s satisfaction”

The anicca nature means NOTHING in this world has real value

The adult will recognize the “anicca nature” of the chocolate: it can only bring happiness only for a few minutes!

That is “aniccaṃ khayaṭṭhena,” which means “anicca nature leads to one to the downside,” i.e., to do immoral acts and to end up experiencing unimaginable suffering (dukkha dukkha) in the apāyā. Thus anicca nature not only means that one cannot maintain things to one’s satisfaction in the long run but ALSO, it can lead to much suffering in the future. - This is very surprising to me. Are you saying that one doesn't do immoral acts due to the 3 mulas but due to the nature of the world? Then shouldn't we all be doing immoral acts all the time because that is the nature of the world and that we will never actually get out of doing immoral acts?

It is an illusion to believe that ANY object in this world will have the “nicca” nature. That there are things in this world that have real, lasting value. The reality is the opposite expressed by the word “anicca.” One meaning of “anicca” is that there is nothing in this world of value that can bring lasting happiness.

I will stop here since this covers your articles about Anicca itself in a sense as you've given.

You have referred to anicca as:
- An inability keep what one likes
- An inability to maintain what one likes
- An inability to maintain things to our satisfaction in the long run
- As a truth that nothing in this world can be maintained to our satisfaction
- An inability/impossibility to maintain anything to our satisfaction
- A nature of the world
- A perception of one's mind
- A profound concept
- A condition for the rebirth process
- A nature that nothing in this world has real value
- A nature that only brings happiness for a short time
- A nature that leads one to do immoral acts and end up in apaya
- There is nothing in this world that can bring lasting happiness


You can't say it's all of them, because many of them contradict each other. They vary in meaning vastly.
There is a difference between saying maintain and keep. Just like saying what one likes and one's satisfaction.
A nature and a perception, one cannot be both; a nature is inherent, a perception requires a perceiver. You could say it's a nature of humans to perceive the nature of the world as anicca(as per your usage), but then it needs clarification as to which definition of anicca from above. If for example you use the meaning "A nature of the world" it would make no sense at all; it would read, "It's a nature of humans to perceive the nature of the world as a nature of the world". Does any of this lead to clarity or does it lead to confusion?
Lal
Posts: 949
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2016 11:39 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by Lal »

I neither agree nor disagree with Sutta Central translations because I never used them.
Don't make me laugh. You don't know what is meant by vinnana or sankhara and thus you cannot explain those two suttas. I am just asking whether or not you agree with those translations. You don't need to "use" Sutta Central translations to answer that question. It is not a trick question.

No point in having a discussion UNLESS you answer the simple question. How can I discuss Buddha Dhamma with someone who does not know what vinnana and sankhara mean?

By the way, I have explained anicca, dukkha, anatta with so many posts:https://puredhamma.net/key-dhamma-conce ... -anatta-2/
- Many of them are also here at the DW forum. But it is easier to use the above link since all relevant posts are in one section there.
- The problem is: you may be expecting a simple (and stupid) translation of anicca as "impermanence."

No more responses from me unless you respond to my simple question about those two suttas.

P.S. For your convenience, I am reproducing the Pali version and English translation side-by-side for both suttas below:
https://suttacentral.net/ud1.1/en/sujat ... ript=latin
https://suttacentral.net/ud1.2/en/sujat ... ript=latin

Then you can read my criticism here: "Distortion of Pāli Keywords in Paṭicca Samuppāda" posted on Nov 28, 2021viewtopic.php?t=26749&start=1410
Post Reply