Paññā and yoniso manasikāra

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Alrac
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2022 4:29 am

Re: Paññā and yoniso manasikāra

Post by Alrac »

retrofuturist wrote: Thu Sep 22, 2022 11:28 pm Arising is dependent origination, per SN 12.10 or any other Sutta where you see the phrase "arising, arising".
If have a plane to board. :alien:
SteRo
Posts: 5950
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:27 am
Location: Εὐρώπη Eurṓpē

Re: Paññā and yoniso manasikāra

Post by SteRo »

retrofuturist wrote: Mon Sep 12, 2022 7:35 pm Greetings,

If all sankhata-dhamma or paticcasamuppanne-dhamma (fabricated things) are to be let go of, then what use or benefit is there in systematizing them?
It satisfies the desire to do so.
retrofuturist wrote: Mon Sep 12, 2022 7:35 pm Accordingly, how should paññā (wisdom) itself be regarded with yoniso manasikāra (appropriate attention)?
Even though mentality is reflexive it isn't possible that a particular mentality aspect "paññā" may be regarded by another particular mentality aspect "yoniso manasikāra".
Cleared. αδόξαστος.
Alrac
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2022 4:29 am

Re: Paññā and yoniso manasikāra

Post by Alrac »

retrofuturist wrote: Thu Sep 22, 2022 11:28 pm Arising is dependent origination, per SN 12.10 or any other Sutta where you see the phrase "arising, arising".
Maybe but the physical arising of bread in an oven due to yeast is different than the mental arising of craving for bread. If all sankata is caused by ignorance, it means the Buddha's mind did not conceptualize sankata; the Buddha did not have a sankhara aggregate.
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Paññā and yoniso manasikāra

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Alrac,
retrofuturist wrote: Thu Sep 22, 2022 11:28 pm Arising is dependent origination, per SN 12.10 or any other Sutta where you see the phrase "arising, arising".
Alrac wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 3:46 amMaybe but the physical arising of bread in an oven due to yeast is different than the mental arising of craving for bread.
Yes, the former has nothing to do with arising in the Dhamma, whereas the latter does. I invite you to show an example of arising in the discourses that is disconnected from fabrication.
Alrac wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 3:46 amIf all sankata is caused by ignorance, it means the Buddha's mind did not conceptualize sankata; the Buddha did not have a sankhara aggregate.
The aggregates are whatever has or will be taken up and bundled to form a sense of self. Once the Buddha became enlightened, he no longer took anything as self, but he still recalls having done so formerly, and does not lose that memory, and so is able to speak of past abodes and such. A Buddha lays down the burden.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
Alrac
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2022 4:29 am

Re: Paññā and yoniso manasikāra

Post by Alrac »

retrofuturist wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 6:21 amI invite you to show an example of arising in the discourses that is disconnected from fabrication.
Didn't you previously say wisdom was sankhata fabricated? If paticca-arising is fabricated from ignorance, how can wisdom, being a sankhata fabricated thing, also be paticca-fabricated from ignorance. You appear to be saying wisdom is paticca-fabricated from ignorance. You appear to be saying ignorance is the cause of wisdom. You appear to be saying the Noble Eightfold Path is sankhata-fabricated from paticca-ignorance.
retrofuturist wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 6:21 amThe aggregates are whatever has or will be taken up and bundled to form a sense of self.
Are you saying Buddhism only teaches there are clinging-aggregates? Are you saying there are no aggregates free from clinging? Are you saying when those five arahants realized the aggregates were impermanent, dukkha & not-self, they stopped perceiving "aggregates"?
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Paññā and yoniso manasikāra

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Alrac,
Alrac wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 8:43 am Didn't you previously say wisdom was sankhata fabricated? If paticca-arising is fabricated from ignorance, how can wisdom, being a sankhata fabricated thing, also be paticca-fabricated from ignorance. You appear to be saying wisdom is paticca-fabricated from ignorance. You appear to be saying ignorance is the cause of wisdom. You appear to be saying the Noble Eightfold Path is sankhata-fabricated from paticca-ignorance.
Because the avijja of paticcasamuppada is not having the Right Knowledge of the arahant. It is not merely synonymous with moha.
retrofuturist wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 6:21 amThe aggregates are whatever has or will be taken up and bundled to form a sense of self.
Alrac wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 8:43 amAre you saying Buddhism only teaches there are clinging-aggregates?
No. The arahant has no clinging aggregates as there is no clinging. Aggregates (alone) for the arahant are as explained in my previous post. These are not the same.
Alrac wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 8:43 am Are you saying when those five arahants realized the aggregates were impermanent, dukkha & not-self, they stopped perceiving "aggregates"?
I'm saying that they stopped aggregating, but we appear to have drifted somewhat from the topic.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
AlexBrains92
Posts: 1211
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2020 11:25 pm

Re: Paññā and yoniso manasikāra

Post by AlexBrains92 »

retrofuturist wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 9:30 am Because the avijja of paticcasamuppada is not having the Right Knowledge of the arahant. It is not merely synonymous with moha.
It's not merely synonymous with moha, yet avijjā is a presence just like that, and just like papañca. They are all different expressions of the same condition. It's illogical to consider avijjā as a mere absence of sammā-ñāṇa (see also: the term 'vijjā' is very rarely used in the sutta-s), since avijjā is part of paṭiccasamuppāda, whereas sammā-ñāṇa is the "result" of the cessation of that. Rather it's sammā-ñāṇa that is an absence of avijjā. Sammā-ñāṇa is not magga (which culminates in sammā-samādhi): it's nirodha, just like sammā-vimutti. Would you also consider sammā-vimutti as fabricated? I don't think so. Furthermore, if sammā-ñāṇa was fabricated, nibbāna would be conditioned. It's just illogical.

«He does not construct even the subtlest apperception with regard
to what is seen, heard or thought; how would one conceptualise
that Brahmin in this world, who does not appropriate a view?

They do not fabricate, they do not prefer, they do not accept any
doctrine; the Brahmin cannot be inferred through virtue or vows,
such a person has gone to the far shore and does not fall back.»


- Snp 4.5 -
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: Paññā and yoniso manasikāra

Post by Pulsar »

Misty wrote
Manasikara has hooked my curiosity.
it is one of the nicest things to be hooked on, to be curious about, soteriologically speaking, ie it is how to "release the self from suffering"
Misty continues
"I’m struggling to sort out and understand what part of the process is being addressed with manasikara."
It is the wisdom part of the process that is addressed.
  • The term appears frequently in the Suttas as yoniso-manasikāra, 'wise (or reasoned, methodical) attention' or 'wise reflection'.
Misty wrote:
Does manasikara identify and define only one action/movement of consciousness or does it encompass several functional actions/movements of consciousness?[/quote]

Wise manasikara guides the entire process, it is the ultimate diligence, avoidance of distraction. Forms appear in the mind incessantly via the six consciousnesses.
Consciousness births and dies constantly, Eye consciousness? ear consciousness, nose, tongue, touch, mind consciousness!
Misty wrote
Is manasikara the movement of consciousness focusing in on an object that has already been foregrounded as most relevant?
Although there are descriptions like this which makes the reader think that the process is supposed to focus on an object (which can be misleading), however, if the object is understood as Nibbana, no problem.
If an object comes to attention, the process of DO has already come into play, identification has already begun.
Misty wrote:
Is manasikara the movement of consciousness that somehow scans for or somehow finds relevance which determines an object that is then isolated or selected out from all the possibilities that can be taken as an object?
I already answered this.
Yoniso Manasikara would be similar to diligently paying attention to a process that creates suffering, the wisdom in that process, would be the avoidance of suffering.
Whatever the eye consciousness, ear consciousness (all the 6 senses) fetch labeled as "I see" "I hear" with an "I" attached, create problems. Remember the advice to Malunkayputta? SN 35.95.
"you are not in the seen, you are neither here, nor there, nor in the in between"
implying things would be constantly seen, heard, or sensed, but as long as you don't claim ownership, you are free.
Misty continues
Has my curiosity gone astray here? Is this line of inquiry picking up the scent of its meaning?
I don't think your curiosity has gone astray. I recall Dr. Richard Gombrich mentioning Yoniso Manasikara. He finally understood it with the help of one of his graduate students, Huang? he admits.
Gombrich has done a great service by pointing out where the Pali tradition was influenced by other traditions.
One who wisely pays attention, will attend to the first step of DO and avoid the origination of suffering.
If you read suttas of Samyukta agama, a recurrent theme found there is "Don't touch the eye, ear, nose, tongue, touch, mind" which has a metaphorical implication.
If you understand this brief advice and learn how to execute it, you are practising Yoniso Manasikara. When you practice this for a few min of the day, that is ultimate Samadhi, for those few min of the day. Outside of those few min, you will spend quite some time, reflecting on
"how to improve this practice"

Also to give you an excerpt from a text
  • Manasikara appears frequently in the Suttas as yoniso-manasikāra, 'wise (or reasoned, methodical) attention' or 'wise reflection'. Wise reflection counteracts the asavas, or thirst, or longing.
  • Unwise attention Ayoniso-manasikara leads to the arising of Five hindrances.
Regards :candle:
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Paññā and yoniso manasikāra

Post by Alex123 »

Pulsar wrote: Sat Sep 24, 2022 12:28 pm If you read suttas of Samyukta agama, a recurrent theme found there is "Don't touch the eye, ear, nose, tongue, touch, mind" which has a metaphorical implication.
If you understand this brief advice and learn how to execute it, you are practising Yoniso Manasikara. When you practice this for a few min of the day, that is ultimate Samadhi, for those few min of the day. Outside of those few min, you will spend quite some time, reflecting on
"how to improve this practice"
Interesting. Can you please explain what exactly do you mean when you say "don't touch the eye..."?
What exactly do you mean by "touch"?


Thank you,

:namaste:
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: Paññā and yoniso manasikāra

Post by Pulsar »

Alex123 wrote
Pulsar wrote: ↑Sat Sep 24, 2022 12:28 pm
If you read suttas of Samyukta agama, a recurrent theme found there is "Don't touch the eye, ear, nose, tongue, touch, mind" which has a metaphorical implication.
If you understand this brief advice and learn how to execute it, you are practising Yoniso Manasikara. When you practice this for a few min of the day, that is ultimate Samadhi, for those few min of the day. Outside of those few min, you will spend quite some time, reflecting on
"how to improve this practice"
Interesting. Can you please explain what exactly do you mean when you say "don't touch the eye..."?
What exactly do you mean by "touch"?
Touch is a simple translation of the word Phassa. If Phassa does not come into play, the process of DO does not come into play.
This is what happens in an Arahant. Arahant sees, hears, senses, but does not touch the things seen, heard or sensed.
If you need further elaboration please ask.
Regards :candle:
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22383
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Paññā and yoniso manasikāra

Post by Ceisiwr »

Pulsar wrote: Sun Sep 25, 2022 3:42 pm
Alex123 wrote
Pulsar wrote: ↑Sat Sep 24, 2022 12:28 pm
If you read suttas of Samyukta agama, a recurrent theme found there is "Don't touch the eye, ear, nose, tongue, touch, mind" which has a metaphorical implication.
If you understand this brief advice and learn how to execute it, you are practising Yoniso Manasikara. When you practice this for a few min of the day, that is ultimate Samadhi, for those few min of the day. Outside of those few min, you will spend quite some time, reflecting on
"how to improve this practice"
Interesting. Can you please explain what exactly do you mean when you say "don't touch the eye..."?
What exactly do you mean by "touch"?
Touch is a simple translation of the word Phassa. If Phassa does not come into play, the process of DO does not come into play.
This is what happens in an Arahant. Arahant sees, hears, senses, but does not touch the things seen, heard or sensed.
If you need further elaboration please ask.
Regards :candle:
This is nonsensical.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Paññā and yoniso manasikāra

Post by Alex123 »

Pulsar wrote: Sun Sep 25, 2022 3:42 pm
Alex123 wrote
Pulsar wrote: ↑Sat Sep 24, 2022 12:28 pm
If you read suttas of Samyukta agama, a recurrent theme found there is "Don't touch the eye, ear, nose, tongue, touch, mind" which has a metaphorical implication.
If you understand this brief advice and learn how to execute it, you are practising Yoniso Manasikara. When you practice this for a few min of the day, that is ultimate Samadhi, for those few min of the day. Outside of those few min, you will spend quite some time, reflecting on
"how to improve this practice"
Interesting. Can you please explain what exactly do you mean when you say "don't touch the eye..."?
What exactly do you mean by "touch"?
Touch is a simple translation of the word Phassa. If Phassa does not come into play, the process of DO does not come into play.
This is what happens in an Arahant. Arahant sees, hears, senses, but does not touch the things seen, heard or sensed.
If you need further elaboration please ask.
Regards :candle:
Isn't avijja the most important factor bringing D.O. into play?

Also, I understand that D.O. deals with arising/ceasing of dukkha , not with ontology or bare perceptual process of an Arahant. If D.O. even applies to arahant, it is only in the sense of momentum/results from past causes that no longer produce new suffering. IMHO.
:namaste:
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: Paññā and yoniso manasikāra

Post by Pulsar »

Alex123 wrote
Isn't avijja the most important factor bringing D.O. into play?
It is true, avijja gives rise to sankhara. From those sankharas (mental formations that would not exclude underlying tendencies) arise the desire to touch, or phassa, or commonly called contact.
Contact involves asava, to say it briefly.
SN 14.1-SN 14.9 elaborates on this process vividly, beginning with the diversity of elements (elements are the different kinds of consciousness), diversity of contacts, intentions, desires, quests.
Alex wrote
Also, I understand that D.O. deals with arising/ceasing of dukkha, not with ontology or bare perceptual process of an Arahant. If D.O. even applies to arahant, it is only in the sense of momentum/results from past causes that no longer produce new suffering. IMHO.
DO deals with the arising of dukkha, not with the ceasing of dukkha. I have not made any reference to ontology in my comments.
Your comment
If D.O. even applies to arahant, it is only in the sense of momentum/results from past causes that no longer produce new suffering. IMHO.
I do not say DO applies to an Arahant, (I said an Arahant does not engage in phassa) simply because we know that Arahant has cut off ignorance, and has no underlying tendencies.
I don't quite understand what you mean by
"If Do even applies to an Arahant it is only in the sense of momentum/results from past causes that no longer produce new suffering. IMHO"
Arahant is free of mind-created suffering. DO does not apply to the Arahant. DO is about the Origination of Suffering cyclically, stated simply.
Regards :candle:
Post Reply