Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Spiny Norman
Posts: 8331
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by Spiny Norman »

Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Jun 15, 2021 9:36 am
Spiny Norman wrote: Tue Jun 15, 2021 8:08 am
Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Jun 15, 2021 7:18 am It’s worth noting that the elements (dhatu) in general aren’t physical “things” but are qualities of experience. For example, apart from the 4 elements there is the pleasure element or the element of exertion and so on. They aren’t talking about what stuff makes up things, but aspects of direct experience. Empiricism, not Rationalism.
Perhaps, but this doesn't mean that the mahabhuta are qualities of experience.
What we experience is form derived from the mahabhuta.
I see no reason why the 4 mahabhuta are treated in anyway different from all the other elements. As shown previously, the grammar indicates that they are qualities to be experienced as do other suttas (the wood pile). The wood pile is no more made out of earth, water, fire and air (does that even make sense?) than it is out of the beauty or ugly element. As I say, your interpretation is quite at odds with the Buddha’s own epistemology.
The wood pile is mostly earth element, and I'm not sure that sutta means what you think it means.

Anyway, could you clarify exactly what is experienced with your interpretation?
Is it:
1. The mahabhuta.
2. Form derived from the mahabhuta (rupa).
3. Sense-objects (external ayatana).
4. Something else.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
Bundokji
Posts: 3844
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 11:57 pm

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by Bundokji »

retrofuturist wrote: Tue Jun 15, 2021 9:49 am No. That's a reckless use of an English idiom to represent something that has nothing to do with elements in the Dhamma. A less misleading translation would be Thanissaro's "Because it lies beyond range". You mention "range" later so I assume you know this...
I think it has to do with the relationship between elements and form. The range of senses is partly determined by having a form. For example, i can hear my colleagues talking in a nearby room, but i cannot hear people talking in different neighborhood unless form is moved at a nearby distance that makes the sounds audible.

When discussing the three marks of existence (ontology/form) or the three characteristics of conditioned phenomena (phenomenology/elements), more focus is usually paid to anicca dukkha anatta than sabba and what does it mean in the context of the Buddha's teachings.
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"

This was the last word of the Tathagata.
atipattoh
Posts: 338
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 8:28 am

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by atipattoh »

Spiny Norman wrote: Tue Jun 15, 2021 8:21 am Sorry, but I still don't think MN1 supports your interpretation. Essentially MN1 is describing the shift in view which occurs with the cessation of self-view and "I am".
Yes, that is if the training is complete, fulfill 'B' the 'C' in this post (scroll to bottom), which include rupajhana.

I specifically write
You have to place this sutra within the context of what a bhikkhu who is in higher training should be practicing; to recognize, know; understand (abhijānāti) the 4 elements of the Mahābhūtā
In the post i specifically mentioned Mahābhūtā; so, it doesn't cover the bottom of the text in MN1.

I didn't think that it was necessary to describe further details not related to OP in another long post, as I have mentioned "rūpasaññānaṁ samatikkamā" in the previous long post.

4 elements practice that I have described, is only preparation of rupajhana, "whose mind has not yet reached the goal" still has further training that is required from him. He has to complete the rupajhana training, using that as his strength to further fulfill his complete training on the 4 elements training. Good parami one may skip the 4 elements preparation training, direct rupajhana, then complete 4 elements. The rest follows the 9 attainments and release of the heart description.

I have a bit of concern, are you implying that, one sits down, closes his eyes, and start psycho himself to denying this-that as self, one can remove the conceit 'I ME MINE'?
Pulsar
Posts: 1320
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by Pulsar »

mikenz66
wrote atipattoh wrote: ↑Mon Jun 14, 2021 2:32 am
I was reading the abhidhamma yesterday, constructing the content for posting, but appolgy, being a bit slow. It seems more interesting to read the text when there is challenging quest. But still take up hell lot of time. Every time I re-read my content, always try to add in. :)
Thanks for the extremely useful analysis! I hope that any answer will be as well thought-out and detailed.
Dearest Mike, since you found atipattoh's elaboration of rupa useful, can you pl. break it down for me. My question is does it help you understand rupa in Nama-rupa any better? Should that not be our only concern?
How to cancel Dependent Origination of suffering?
Suffering originates when rupa appears in the mind due to craving? If we can avoid the generation of rupa in the mind it solves the problem of suffering.
Without the aid of Abhidhamma do we not understand that?
With love :candle:
Pulsar
Posts: 1320
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by Pulsar »

atipatttoh wrote
4 elements practice that I have described, is only preparation of rupajhana, "whose mind has not yet reached the goal" still has further training that is required from him. He has to complete the rupajhana training, using that as his strength to further fulfill his complete training on the 4 elements training. Good parami one may skip the 4 elements preparation training, direct rupajhana, then complete 4 elements. The rest follows the 9 attainments and release of the heart description.
At which point in the 8-fold path, does this information have a relevance or application?
I don't quite get it, or is it mere abhidhammic elaboration without a practical application.
Be Well! :candle:
Pulsar
Posts: 1320
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by Pulsar »

Can atipatttoh, or mikenz66 or any other abhidhamma expert answer the following?
Why do the abhidhammikas call the formless samapatti Jhana? Sutta pitaka never does that.
A brief excerpt 
  • "jhana characteristics of formless plane"
Does the formless plane have jhana characteristics?
https://suttacentral.net/vb12/en/thittila
  • Why does vibhanga have 7 types of consciousness?
Suttas write there are only six.
By sneaking in a so-called mind element in between 5th sense consciousness and mind consciousness, is an invisible self being snuck in?
  • What is the mind element? What is its  function? Why the necessity?
In the Kalahavivada sutta 4th jhana is described as the domain to get rid of form. Hence meditator monks like Ajahn Brahm calls 4th jhana, formless jhana, but it is not a reference to Formless samapattis, which Buddha did not approve of.
When the meditator is devoid of worldly consciousness, rupa does not appear to the meditator, hence DO comes to a standstill.
Yet formless samapattis are found in the Sutta pitaka. Could it be that the abhidhammika sutta compilers who thought that formless samapatthis possessed jhana characteristics, be responsible for this anomalous presence. This presence misleads many Buddhists.
Sutta Pitaka definitely has two strata of suttas, scholars agree.
First is not influenced by abhidhamma teachings.
There is a second layer influenced by abhidhamma teachings e.g. MN 111 MN 43 where words are fed into the
mouths of Buddha and Sariputta.
These teachings differed from Buddha's teachings, and created confusion.
Did abhidhamma evolve to explain its own creations?

A verse in Kalahavivada Sn4.11. was crucial to my understanding of 4th jhana.
I have discussed this in great detail on my jhana thread.
viewtopic.php?f=43&t=34757&start=540
Yet the vibanga completely misinterpreted the content of Sn14.11 verse # 874.
 
Can atipatttoh explain how Abhidhamma defines consciousness? How has Buddha defined consciousness? How did Upanisads define Vinnana?
Your reply will help me understand why Vibhanga made an error in its interpretation?
I like this sober discussion.
With love :candle:
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 18614
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by mikenz66 »

Pulsar wrote: Wed Jun 16, 2021 7:39 pm Can atipatttoh, or mikenz66 or any other abhidhamma expert answer the following? ...
I'm not an abhidhamma expert, I'm just here to learn about Dhamma. I commented on atipatttoh's post becauwe I found it much more useful and interesting than the simplistic criticisms of the Abhidhamma and Commentaries that I see on this Forum.

:heart:
Mike :quote:
Pulsar
Posts: 1320
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by Pulsar »

mikenz66 wrote
I commented on atipatttoh's post becauwe I found it much more useful and interesting
Can you pl. tell me in what sense you found it useful and interesting? I am interested in learning how
abhidhamma helps us understand suttas better.
Be well! :candle:
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 18614
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by mikenz66 »

Pulsar wrote: Wed Jun 16, 2021 8:44 pm mikenz66 wrote
I commented on atipatttoh's post becauwe I found it much more useful and interesting
Can you pl. tell me in what sense you found it useful and interesting? I am interested in learning how
abhidhamma helps us understand suttas better.
Be well! :candle:
Sorry, I don't have the time or interest to write an essay elaborating on a post. If you don't find the post interesting, that's fine.

:heart:
Mike
Spiny Norman
Posts: 8331
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by Spiny Norman »

Pulsar wrote: Wed Jun 16, 2021 7:39 pm Can atipatttoh, or mikenz66 or any other abhidhamma expert answer the following?
Why do the abhidhammikas call the formless samapatti Jhana? Sutta pitaka never does that.
A brief excerpt 
  • "jhana characteristics of formless plane"
Does the formless plane have jhana characteristics?
https://suttacentral.net/vb12/en/thittila
  • Why does vibhanga have 7 types of consciousness?
Suttas write there are only six.
By sneaking in a so-called mind element in between 5th sense consciousness and mind consciousness, is an invisible self being snuck in?
  • What is the mind element? What is its  function? Why the necessity?
In the Kalahavivada sutta 4th jhana is described as the domain to get rid of form. Hence meditator monks like Ajahn Brahm calls 4th jhana, formless jhana, but it is not a reference to Formless samapattis, which Buddha did not approve of.
When the meditator is devoid of worldly consciousness, rupa does not appear to the meditator, hence DO comes to a standstill.
Yet formless samapattis are found in the Sutta pitaka. Could it be that the abhidhammika sutta compilers who thought that formless samapatthis possessed jhana characteristics, be responsible for this anomalous presence. This presence misleads many Buddhists.
Sutta Pitaka definitely has two strata of suttas, scholars agree.
First is not influenced by abhidhamma teachings.
There is a second layer influenced by abhidhamma teachings e.g. MN 111 MN 43 where words are fed into the
mouths of Buddha and Sariputta.
These teachings differed from Buddha's teachings, and created confusion.
Did abhidhamma evolve to explain its own creations?

A verse in Kalahavivada Sn4.11. was crucial to my understanding of 4th jhana.
I have discussed this in great detail on my jhana thread.
viewtopic.php?f=43&t=34757&start=540
Yet the vibanga completely misinterpreted the content of Sn14.11 verse # 874.
 
Can atipatttoh explain how Abhidhamma defines consciousness? How has Buddha defined consciousness? How did Upanisads define Vinnana?
Your reply will help me understand why Vibhanga made an error in its interpretation?
I like this sober discussion.
With love :candle:
I'd be interested to hear what you think vinnana is in the suttas, and what cessation of consciousness means, practically speaking.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
SarathW
Posts: 16599
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by SarathW »

Pulsar wrote: Wed Jun 16, 2021 8:44 pm mikenz66 wrote
I commented on atipatttoh's post becauwe I found it much more useful and interesting
Can you pl. tell me in what sense you found it useful and interesting? I am interested in learning how
abhidhamma helps us understand suttas better.
Be well! :candle:
Hi Pulsar
This is something like you asking someone whether s/he is enlightened.
Whichever way the answer it is no use to you because you have not come to that stage as yet.
Have you read Abhidhamma?
At least you should have a very basic knowledge of Abhidhamma like me.

Abhidhamma helps me to understand Anatta in a more logical way, even though the realisation is not logical.
Secondly, it helps me with my Satipathana practice.
Thirdly it is a valuable tool for a teacher to answer technical questions.
Do not throw away the baby with bad water. Even sutta's got its flow.

Why don't you read Abhidhamma in Practice article. it is short and easy to understand.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/aut ... el322.html
Last edited by SarathW on Thu Jun 17, 2021 9:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
SarathW
Posts: 16599
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by SarathW »

Pulsar wrote: Wed Jun 16, 2021 7:39 pm Can atipatttoh, or mikenz66 or any other abhidhamma expert answer the following?
Why do the abhidhammikas call the formless samapatti Jhana? Sutta pitaka never does that.
A brief excerpt 
  • "jhana characteristics of formless plane"
Does the formless plane have jhana characteristics?

Yes. They are a type of Jhana or places.



 
Can atipatttoh explain how Abhidhamma defines consciousness? How has Buddha defined consciousness? How did Upanisads define Vinnana?

Abhidhamma and Sutta both explain the consciousness exactly the sameway.
Ie: When object Rupa) contact with the sense base (Prasada Rupa) the consciousness arise.
https://puredhamma.net/tables-and-summa ... rial-form/


“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Spiny Norman
Posts: 8331
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by Spiny Norman »

SarathW wrote: Thu Jun 17, 2021 9:05 am
Pulsar wrote: Wed Jun 16, 2021 7:39 pm Can atipatttoh, or mikenz66 or any other abhidhamma expert answer the following?
Why do the abhidhammikas call the formless samapatti Jhana? Sutta pitaka never does that.
A brief excerpt 
  • "jhana characteristics of formless plane"
Does the formless plane have jhana characteristics?

Yes. They are a type of Jhana or places.



 
Can atipatttoh explain how Abhidhamma defines consciousness? How has Buddha defined consciousness? How did Upanisads define Vinnana?

Abhidhamma and Sutta both explain the consciousness exactly the sameway.
Ie: When object Rupa) contact with the sense base (Prasada Rupa) the consciousness arise.
https://puredhamma.net/tables-and-summa ... rial-form/


The sutta formula is sense-consciousness arising in dependence on sense-base and sense-object.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
SarathW
Posts: 16599
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by SarathW »

Spiny Norman wrote: Thu Jun 17, 2021 10:52 am
SarathW wrote: Thu Jun 17, 2021 9:05 am
Pulsar wrote: Wed Jun 16, 2021 7:39 pm Can atipatttoh, or mikenz66 or any other abhidhamma expert answer the following?
Why do the abhidhammikas call the formless samapatti Jhana? Sutta pitaka never does that.
A brief excerpt 
  • "jhana characteristics of formless plane"
Does the formless plane have jhana characteristics?

Yes. They are a type of Jhana or places.



 
Can atipatttoh explain how Abhidhamma defines consciousness? How has Buddha defined consciousness? How did Upanisads define Vinnana?

Abhidhamma and Sutta both explain the consciousness exactly the sameway.
Ie: When object Rupa) contact with the sense base (Prasada Rupa) the consciousness arise.
https://puredhamma.net/tables-and-summa ... rial-form/


The sutta formula is sense-consciousness arising in dependence on sense-base and sense-object.
Theis where Hadaya Vathu comes to play in Abhidhamma.
Unfrotunately I can't find an English source article explaining this.
You have to speak to a good Abhidhamma teacher.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
AlexBrains92
Posts: 584
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2020 11:25 pm

Re: Retrofuturist's Brief Sutta-Based Refutation of Abhidhamma

Post by AlexBrains92 »

To Paul:
:goodpost: :goodpost: :goodpost: ......
Stop conceptual proliferation!

Keep noble silence...
Post Reply