Dependent Origination, Dukkha and Rebirth

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Dependent Origination, Dukkha and Rebirth

Post by mikenz66 »

Noble Sangha wrote: Sat Dec 03, 2022 5:18 am
mikenz66 wrote: Sat Dec 03, 2022 1:32 am
Noble Sangha wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 11:23 pm Depending on how and where things go, I might try to explain and share an example on how one can understand the differences between pancakkhandha and the pancupadanakkhandha.
That would be helpful, as I'm yet to see an explanation that makes much sense to me.

:heart:
Mike
Thank you for your direct or indirect encouragement. It helped me decide that I will write something up. It might take some time for the write up, but I hope the explanation will help us all.
Thanks. Here is a discussions from elsewhere:
https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/kh ... -not/27328
From a link there: https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/bh ... tes/6906/3
In conclusion, I think the Abhidhamma/Bodhi reading rests on overly slim inference while directly contradicting the source text.
Rather, it seems to me simpler to see the source text as not pointing to different sets of things, but two different perspectives on the same thing. The “bare” aggregates show “what is”, while the “grasping aggregates” show how grasping to “what is” leads to suffering.

This kind of analysis is not uncommon in the suttas. Compare, for example, SN 12.20, which draws a distinction between “dependent origination” and “dependently originated phenomena”. The point here is not that these are distinct things, but that they are two aspects or ways of looking at the same process.

Thus the question of whether the “bare” aggregates refer to an arahant does not even come up: that’s not what the Sutta is about.
:heart:
Mike
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22286
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Dependent Origination, Dukkha and Rebirth

Post by Ceisiwr »

riceandcashews wrote: Sat Dec 03, 2022 7:47 pm What exactly is the claim that is being disputed here? I read through the thread but am still somewhat unclear.
To counter the view that dependent origination has nothing to do with rebirth, and that the aggregates are not dukkha if not clung to. To argue instead that they are, and always will be, a heap of suffering. This also touches upon if Arahants still experience some dukkha, whilst alive. I'm arguing that they do.
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
Noble Sangha
Posts: 94
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2021 5:27 pm

Re: Dependent Origination, Dukkha and Rebirth

Post by Noble Sangha »

An unforeseen and fruitful experience just happened for me by participating in this thread. I would like to share this experience and would like to thank the participants in this thread.

Jack19990101 you mentioned:

"Re arahant vs dependent origination

Speculatively -
Arahant is free of view of dependent origination;
actually, I think they are free of view of cause/consequences/sequencing all together, regardless it is dependent origination, secular, or kammic.
Extrapolated -
They are free of view of Sila, ethics, and N8P too."

My reply was:

"What you brought up is something that can be quite tricky / difficult to answer and might need explanations and clarifications. Even myself is not completely confident at this moment where I can explain or clarify this to myself with complete satisfaction. I would need to dig deeper and spend more time and effort in contemplating what you mentioned. But this is not where my focus and learning is at this time.

What makes what you mentioned tricky or difficult to draw conclusions from is that it would require precise wording and explanations. You use the word "free", I could think of support for what you mentioned, but also inconsistencies that may come up. For example, we could say Arahants and the Buddha "are free" of the Noble 8 Fold Path because they have completed it. But at the same time, it doesn't necessary mean that they don't use the Noble 8 Fold Path or the understanding or Paticca Samuppada. To make this example even more clearer and easier to understand is that think of us completing high school or post secondary. We could say we're "done or free" of high school or post secondary, but even after being done or free of schooling, we might still being using what we learned in school. Just like the Buddha or Arahants, they might be "free / done / completed" the Noble 8 Fold Path, but it doesn't necessary mean that they don't "use" what they have completed or free from.

Until someone has attained parinibbana, can we really say someone is "completely" free from the Noble 8 Fold Path even though they have completed it? Another way of understanding this is until someone attains parinibbana, can we really say that person is "completely" free from the 5 aggregates?"

I believe mikenz66 and some of the materials shared in the links he posted just indirectly helped me anyways and possibly for Jack.
Thanks. Here is a discussions from elsewhere:
https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/kh ... -not/27328
From a link there: https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/bh ... tes/6906/3
The materials in the links that I quickly scanned through, unexpectedly I was able to come across a sutta that I didn't know about (I have read very little sutta's. . . ) that is relevant to the discussion that Jack and I were having. As well I believe a source of evidence for what we mentioned is in the right direction and can help possibly clear up any misunderstandings that we might have in regards to what we discussed.

The sutta is Silavantasutta (SN 22.122)

https://suttacentral.net/sn22.122/en/su ... ript=latin

“But Reverend Sāriputta, what things should a perfected one properly attend to?”
“Arahatā panāvuso sāriputta, katame dhammā yoniso manasi kātabbā”ti?

“Reverend Koṭṭhita, a perfected one should also properly attend to the five grasping aggregates as impermanent, as suffering, as diseased, as a boil, as a dart, as misery, as an affliction, as alien, as falling apart, as empty, as not-self.
“Arahatāpi kho, āvuso koṭṭhika, ime pañcupādānakkhandhe aniccato dukkhato rogato gaṇḍato sallato aghato ābādhato parato palokato suññato anattato yoniso manasi kātabbā.

A perfected one has nothing more to do, and nothing that needs improvement.
Natthi, khvāvuso, arahato uttari karaṇīyaṁ katassa vā paticayo;

Still, these things, when developed and cultivated, lead to blissful meditation in the present life, and also to mindfulness and situational wareness.”
api ca ime dhammā bhāvitā bahulīkatā diṭṭhadhammasukhavihārāya ceva saṁvattanti satisampajaññāya cā”ti.

(Now no longer related to Jack19990101 and I discussion). What's even more surprising to me is that in the very same sutta:

“Reverend Sāriputta, what things should an ethical mendicant properly attend to?”
“sīlavatāvuso, sāriputta, bhikkhunā katame dhammā yoniso manasikātabbā”ti?

“Reverend Koṭṭhita, an ethical mendicant should properly attend to the five grasping aggregates as impermanent, as suffering, as diseased, as a boil, as a dart, as misery, as an affliction, as alien, as falling apart, as empty, as not-self.
“Sīlavatāvuso, koṭṭhika, bhikkhunā pañcupādānakkhandhā aniccato dukkhato rogato gaṇḍato sallato aghato ābādhato parato palokato suññato anattato yoniso manasi kātabbā.

Have been emphasizing the importance of understanding the differences and similarities and "try get some' understanding of pancupadanakkhandha and pancakkhandha. Didn't expect to come across the sutta mentioning and helping me to confirm what I believed and mentioned.

Something should be clear though, the sutta's that I quote and others quote from, if it's translated to a certain language. English in our case, I don't always agree with the translations, especially on certain key / important Buddha dhamma Pali teaching words that one should be competent in understanding. Competent, meaning not only depending on other's translations and teachings, but also by using one's own life experiences / observation and contemplation to scrutinize what one learns and understands and coming to their own conclusions what the Pali words mean, especially for key Buddha dhamma Pali words. . Why is something like this important?

For example . . . rupakkhandha is commonly translated as "form aggregate", but without further explanation what rupakkhandha or form aggregate means, one can literally the English word "form" as it's meaning. But the English word "form" doesn't give the full understanding / meaning and sometime not the correct understanding of what "rupa" really means / is. Here's some English definition's of "form" that I googled.

"the shape and structure of something as distinguished from its material"

"a body (as of a person) especially in its external appearance or as distinguished from the face"

"the visible shape or configuration of something"

And so on . . .

Form (rupa) or IMO better left untranslated as "rupa". The reason is so that other's can try to explain what "rupa" means / is according to their own understanding and language. IMO, it's more accurate to say "form can be one aspect of rupa", instead of "rupa means / translated as form". The many definitions for "form" in English barley do any justice what exactly "rupa" means / is.

If one doesn't have some general or proper understanding of what "rupa" means / is, then it would be difficult to understand what rupakkhandha and pancakkhanda is.

Even though I don't always agree with the translations, overall I'm thankful to have at least English translated sutta's as it can sometimes help me to try get the general idea / context what the sutta is teaching. I thank the translators for their time and effort. But . . . not for this discussion . . .

Hi Ceisiwr,
"The clinging vs non-clinging distinction is simply two ways of looking at the same thing"
I know you and others might find this hard to believe, there might be some similarities but it's not really the same thing.
This also touches upon if Arahants still experience some dukkha, whilst alive. I'm arguing that they do.
They do, but would require further explanations and clarification to avoid misunderstandings.
"The aggregates themselves, with clinging or not, however are dukkha. They are dukkha if clung to, and dukkha if not clung to"
I can agree to that, but once again would require further deeper explanations and clarification to avoid misunderstandings.

I sometimes semi cringe when I "see only" English translated words without including the Pali words translated from sutta's that other's use as a source . All I'll say right now is that any language translated from Pali, Sanskrit, Chinese, etc . . . is not always reliable and accurate. Sometimes what's more helpful is to get / give the right idea / concept about the Pali word than giving it a one or two word translation. Many key Pali words don't have English equivalent words.

Ceisiwr, now hopefully I can finish what I'm trying to share with you or help you and others to see. I'll post the Akusala-Mula steps in Pali.

“Katamo ca, bhikkhave, paṭiccasamuppādo? Avijjāpaccayā, bhikkhave, saṅkhārā; saṅkhārapaccayā viññāṇaṁ; viññāṇapaccayā nāmarūpaṁ; nāmarūpapaccayā saḷāyatanaṁ; saḷāyatanapaccayā phasso; phassapaccayā vedanā; vedanāpaccayā taṇhā; taṇhāpaccayā upādānaṁ; upādānapaccayā bhavo; bhavapaccayā jāti; jātipaccayā jarāmaraṇaṁ sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā sambhavanti. Evametassa kevalassa dukkhakkhandhassa samudayo hoti.

I was hoping you would finish listing the steps in Pali as I believed it could've been more beneficial if you did. What I was hoping for you to see is that yourself mentioned you believe the Buddha and Arahants has completely eradicated / eliminated / removed "Tanha" from their minds. But at the same time, you were saying that the Buddha and Arahants are said to still experience the 5 clinging aggregates." But based on using the very basic and fundamental understanding of Paticca Samuppada to analysis what you mentioned. From my understanding and view, what you mentioned or understood doesn't support each other or add up.

I hope you and others understand that I'm not here to put anyone on the spot or trying to belittle others. My intention is the discussions that I have with others hopefully can help them any way possible with their understanding of the Buddha dhamma or see things that they might not have realized.

Now if we analysis the vedanāpaccayā taṇhā; taṇhāpaccayā upādānaṁ; upādānapaccayā bhavo steps in the Akusala-Mula P.S. You mentioned that the Buddha and Arahants have completely eradicated / eliminated / removed "Tanha" from their minds. If that is so, how can tanhapaccaya upadanam step occur? And let's say if tanhapaccaya upadanam step doesn't occur for an Arahant or the Buddha, then how can they be experiencing or initiating the pancupadanakkhandha or the 5 clinging aggregates? Can you and other's see that the UPADANA from "pancupadanakkhandha " and the UPADANA from Paticca Samuppada is the same?

I'm not sure if you and others are able to see what I'm trying to pointed out? "The others" are those that have similar belief that an Arahant or the Buddha still experience pancupadanakkhandha or the 5 clinging aggregates. Instead of saying "they are experiencing the 5 clinging aggregates, it's more accurate to say that they "don't cling to the 5 aggregates or NO MORE UPADANA FOR THE PANCAKKHANDHA)", but are still associated with pancakkhandha (five aggregates) until parinibbana.

:buddha1:
I am a Buddhist that doesn't practice Buddhism. What I practice is nekkhamma, abyāpāda, avihiṁsā, viraga, nirodha or the Noble Eight Fold Path. The elimination / eradication / extermination of defilements, kilesa's, raga, dosa, moha and asava's.

Lineage: Buddha > Sthaviravada > Vibhajjavada > Theravada > Striving for Nibbana.
riceandcashews
Posts: 66
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2022 4:57 pm

Re: Dependent Origination, Dukkha and Rebirth

Post by riceandcashews »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 5:00 am
riceandcashews wrote: Sat Dec 03, 2022 7:47 pm What exactly is the claim that is being disputed here? I read through the thread but am still somewhat unclear.
To counter the view that dependent origination has nothing to do with rebirth, and that the aggregates are not dukkha if not clung to. To argue instead that they are, and always will be, a heap of suffering. This also touches upon if Arahants still experience some dukkha, whilst alive. I'm arguing that they do.
I see, thank you. Interesting, I'm surprised to hear there are some that deny rebirth within Buddhism. That seems against the idea of the larger Buddhist cosmology of devas, hell-beings, etc. and the many teachings related to rebirth in those realms.

Anyway, for what it is worth, my view is that dependent origination is about everything one does with conceit/self-view, and that it applies both to ordinary life and to rebirth both equally and in the same way.

From the outside, in both cases, the arahant looks the same. But from the inside the whole fire of conceit/self-view has gone out, and all suffering born of conceit/self-view has been cleared.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22286
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Dependent Origination, Dukkha and Rebirth

Post by Ceisiwr »

riceandcashews wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 3:48 pm
I see, thank you. Interesting, I'm surprised to hear there are some that deny rebirth within Buddhism. That seems against the idea of the larger Buddhist cosmology of devas, hell-beings, etc. and the many teachings related to rebirth in those realms.
Not all of them do deny rebirth. There are people here who believe in rebirth but argue that dependent origination has nothing to do with it. Others deny rebirth or are sceptical of it, and so also argue that dependent origination has nothing to do with it. Both agree that D.O. isn't about rebirth, but for different reasons.
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22286
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Dependent Origination, Dukkha and Rebirth

Post by Ceisiwr »

Noble Sangha wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 3:23 pm

Hi Ceisiwr,
It would help if you used the quote function to reply to people. It makes for an easier read, and the person also gets a notification when you have replied.
Ceisiwr wrote: "The clinging vs non-clinging distinction is simply two ways of looking at the same thing"

Noble Sangha wrote: "I know you and others might find this hard to believe, there might be some similarities but it's not really the same thing."
They are both the same aggregates, its just one is looked at in terms of clinging and the other without.

Ceisiwr, now hopefully I can finish what I'm trying to share with you or help you and others to see. I'll post the Akusala-Mula steps in Pali.

“Katamo ca, bhikkhave, paṭiccasamuppādo? Avijjāpaccayā, bhikkhave, saṅkhārā; saṅkhārapaccayā viññāṇaṁ; viññāṇapaccayā nāmarūpaṁ; nāmarūpapaccayā saḷāyatanaṁ; saḷāyatanapaccayā phasso; phassapaccayā vedanā; vedanāpaccayā taṇhā; taṇhāpaccayā upādānaṁ; upādānapaccayā bhavo; bhavapaccayā jāti; jātipaccayā jarāmaraṇaṁ sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā sambhavanti. Evametassa kevalassa dukkhakkhandhassa samudayo hoti.

I was hoping you would finish listing the steps in Pali as I believed it could've been more beneficial if you did. What I was hoping for you to see is that yourself mentioned you believe the Buddha and Arahants has completely eradicated / eliminated / removed "Tanha" from their minds. But at the same time, you were saying that the Buddha and Arahants are said to still experience the 5 clinging aggregates." But based on using the very basic and fundamental understanding of Paticca Samuppada to analysis what you mentioned. From my understanding and view, what you mentioned or understood doesn't support each other or add up.
What I mean by that is that the suttas record Arahants meditating on the 5 grasping aggregates. That isn't to say they cling to them. Its to say that there are just the aggregates which are still experienced, but one can look at them in different ways i.e. when subjected to clinging or without clinging.
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
Dhammapardon
Posts: 373
Joined: Mon May 09, 2022 12:11 am

Re: Dependent Origination, Dukkha and Rebirth

Post by Dhammapardon »

Noble Sangha wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 3:23 pm
Now if we analysis the vedanāpaccayā taṇhā; taṇhāpaccayā upādānaṁ; upādānapaccayā bhavo steps in the Akusala-Mula P.S. You mentioned that the Buddha and Arahants have completely eradicated / eliminated / removed "Tanha" from their minds. If that is so, how can tanhapaccaya upadanam step occur? And let's say if tanhapaccaya upadanam step doesn't occur for an Arahant or the Buddha, then how can they be experiencing or initiating the pancupadanakkhandha or the 5 clinging aggregates? Can you and other's see that the UPADANA from "pancupadanakkhandha " and the UPADANA from Paticca Samuppada is the same?

I'm not sure if you and others are able to see what I'm trying to pointed out? "The others" are those that have similar belief that an Arahant or the Buddha still experience pancupadanakkhandha or the 5 clinging aggregates. Instead of saying "they are experiencing the 5 clinging aggregates, it's more accurate to say that they "don't cling to the 5 aggregates or NO MORE UPADANA FOR THE PANCAKKHANDHA)", but are still associated with pancakkhandha (five aggregates) until parinibbana.

:buddha1:
Hello Noble Sangha, thank you for the deep examinations provided here and in other threads. I have been enjoying the learning process stirred by the discussions. I would like to attempt an understanding at the above stated with your help.

If I understand right, upadana from pancupadanakkhandha but still namarupa experiences pancakkhandha?
(I use namarupa as the human body and mind complex)
When me/mine & not me/not mine is rightly understood and experienced, almost everything is same as before, but understood by the experiencer as not me/not mine? Still eyes apprehend things, intellect perceives things, and namarupa experiences taṇhā but no longer MY taṇhā, just taṇhā in namarupa? The being has withdrawn (upadana) from the namarupa as theirs, as them. Now understands them as not theirs, not them. :reading:
Just as a bird, wherever it goes, flies with its wings as its only burden; so too is he content with a set of robes to provide for his body and almsfood to provide for his hunger. Wherever he goes, he takes only his barest necessities along. This is how a monk is content.(DN11)
User avatar
nirodh27
Posts: 681
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 12:31 pm

Re: Dependent Origination, Dukkha and Rebirth

Post by nirodh27 »

mikenz66 wrote: Sat Dec 03, 2022 8:57 pm
Hi Mikenz,
Rather, it seems to me simpler to see the source text as not pointing to different sets of things, but two different perspectives on the same thing. The “bare” aggregates show “what is”, while the “grasping aggregates” show how grasping to “what is” leads to suffering.
...
Thus the question of whether the “bare” aggregates refer to an arahant does not even come up: that’s not what the Sutta is about.
Hi Mikenz,

Thanks for the paper that was very interesting and connected some dots here. I think that Sujato makes a good job here in making clear that the aggregate, say of a woman, is the same and it is the clinging that can be there or not and how the later traditional analysis is hard to subscribe. Given that I've passed all SN22 and most of SA in search of further understanding, I will add something more, unfortunately I've taken annotations and sutta quotes that I've lost and I will not have time to rebuild everything :console: This is also a partial response to other themes expressed in this topic since I have no more time left to dig them in detail.

- As a teaching device Aggregates are all of our experience, Clinging-aggregates are the parts of experience that are tainted by us by greed, aversion and avijja. The two almost coincide for the worlding since identity, me and mines are created almost everywhere in our experience: clinging-aggregates are deeply connected to identity and "I am".

- When we say "the aggregates are Dukkha" we must understand in which sense and why there's a distinction for teaching purpose. The clinging-aggregate distinction helps us to understand that the aggregates are like fire. They are fire, but to be Dukkha we must put our hand on them, we must adhere to them, searching delight in them and cling to them. Or, alternative, we put our hand and they bite us in return.
“One who does not seek delight in form … in consciousness does not seek delight in suffering. One who does not seek delight in suffering, I say, is freed from suffering.”
“So too, bhikkhus, form is not yours … consciousness is not yours: abandon it. When you have abandoned it, that will lead to your welfare and happiness.”
One who fully understands form … and consciousness is freed from form, feeling, perception, volitional formations, and consciousness. He is freed from birth, aging, and death; freed from sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure, and despair; freed from suffering, I say.”
“And, bhikkhus, from what are sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure, and despair born? How are they produced? Here, bhikkhus, the uninstructed worldling, who is not a seer of the noble ones and is unskilled and undisciplined in their Dhamma, who is not a seer of superior persons and is unskilled and undisciplined in their Dhamma, regards form as self, or self as possessing form, or form as in self, or self as in form. That form of his changes and alters. With the change and alteration of form, there arise in him sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure, and despair.

“He regards feeling as self … perception as self … volitional formations as self … consciousness as self, or self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in self, or self as in consciousness. That consciousness of his changes and alters. With the change and alteration of consciousness, there arise in him sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure, and despair.

“But, bhikkhus, when one has understood the impermanence of form, its change, fading away, and cessation, and when one sees as it really is with correct wisdom thus: ‘In the past and also now all form is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change,’ then sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure, and despair are abandoned. With their abandonment, one does not become agitated. Being unagitated, one dwells happily. A bhikkhu who dwells happily is said to be quenched in that respect.

“When one has understood the impermanence of feeling … of perception … of volitional formations … of consciousness, its change, fading away, and cessation, and when one sees as it really is with correct wisdom thus: ‘In the past and also now all consciousness is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change,’ then sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure, and despair are abandoned. With their abandonment, one does not become agitated. Being unagitated, one dwells happily. A bhikkhu who dwells happily is said to be quenched in that respect.
“And what, bhikkhus, is the way leading to the cessation of identity? Here, bhikkhus, the instructed noble disciple … does not regard form as self … nor feeling as self … nor perception as self … nor volitional formations as self … nor consciousness as self … nor self as in consciousness. This, bhikkhus, is called the way leading to the cessation of identity. When it is said, ‘The way leading to the cessation of identity,’ the meaning here is this: a way of regarding things that leads to the cessation of suffering.”
- It is the clinging-aggregates teaching that tells us that there's an escape that you can do now. In fact, to consider the aggregates as Dukkha even when we don't adhere is to go beyond the scope of the teaching and to see Dukkha even when we have realized the escape since when we don't adhere, there's nothing that can touch us. It's like saying that we are burning alive nonethless we are not on fire just because there's a fire near us (or if you prefer suffer because some leaves are burned near us like in the Jeta's grove).
“The five aggregates are truly burdens,
The burden-carrier is the person.
Taking up the burden is suffering in the world,
Laying the burden down is blissful.

Having laid the heavy burden down
Without taking up another burden,
Having drawn out craving with its root,
One is free from hunger, fully quenched.”
- This is the point of having "clinging-aggregates" and not simply aggregates in the first noble truth. The point is that we can see by ourselves the end of suffering by the diminishing (there's a sutta about C.A. reduction too) of the number of clinging-aggregates (so, the aggregates that are tainted by our own doing) and by the single removal of clinging from an aggregate. Every aggregate is potential Dukkha if we take it as mine, every aggregate is fire and potentially murderos. But we have to add a pinch of clinging to them, it is not the mere experience of it being Dukkha else the Arahant would not be happy. By making an analogy, we have to invite the killer to enter. If it is ouside of the building, we are safe and that is not Dukkha even if we look at it from the window.
“And what, bhikkhus, is happiness more spiritual than the spiritual? When a bhikkhu whose taints are destroyed reviews his mind liberated from lust, liberated from hatred, liberated from delusion, there arises happiness. This is called happiness more spiritual than the spiritual.
- That is why neutral-feelings are the best pleasure and fourth jhana is so important to get right knowledge, because the only drawback is that they end, a thing that as we have seen, is again a problem only for those that clings. That doesn't mean that even fourth jhana loses his "being fire" attribute, in fact the drawbacks of fourth jhana must be known as well as the escape (non-clinging).
“What is pleasant and what is painful in each of the three feelings?”
“Pleasant feeling is pleasant when it remains and painful when it perishes. Painful feeling is painful when it remains and pleasant when it perishes. Neutral feeling is pleasant when there is knowledge, and painful when there is ignorance.”
“What underlying tendencies underlie each of the three feelings?”
“The underlying tendency for greed underlies pleasant feeling. The underlying tendency for repulsion underlies painful feeling. The underlying tendency for ignorance underlies neutral feeling.”
“Do these underlying tendencies always underlie these feelings?”
“No, they do not.”

“What should be given up in regard to each of these three feelings?”
“The underlying tendency to greed should be given up when it comes to pleasant feeling. The underlying tendency to repulsion should be given up when it comes to painful feeling. The underlying tendency to ignorance should be given up when it comes to neutral feeling.”
“And how, bhikkhus, is there nonagitation through nonclinging? Here, bhikkhus, the instructed noble disciple, who is a seer of the noble ones and is skilled and disciplined in their Dhamma, who is a seer of superior persons and is skilled and disciplined in their Dhamma, does not regard form as self, or self as possessing form, or form as in self, or self as in form. That form of his changes and alters. Despite the change and alteration of form, his consciousness does not become preoccupied with the change of form. No agitation and constellation of mental states born of preoccupation with the change of form remain obsessing his mind. Because his mind is not obsessed, he is not frightened, distressed, or anxious, and through nonclinging he does not become agitated.

“It is in such a way, bhikkhus, that there is nonagitation through nonclinging.”
- So to see the aggregates without clinging as Dukkha is to miss the point of the path that can have behind a subtle aversion from the aggregates (experience) itself, hoping to terminate them instead of the clinging. Another key point is that innumerable times we find "clinging-aggregates" (and not aggregates ofc) equated as identity. That should give some light also in which way the Arahant can contemplate the "clinging-aggregates", by see the allure, drawbacks and escape of identity, so by actually contemplate the allure he renounced, the drawbacks of what he doesn't risk to experience anymore and the blissful escape he found and in which he abodes. This would open a digression about existence, birth, etc.. but there's no time for me.

- Another key point is in the Yamaka sutta:
“He becomes engaged with form, clings to it, and takes a stand upon it as ‘my self.’ He becomes engaged with feeling … with perception … with volitional formations … with consciousness, clings to it, and takes a stand upon it as ‘my self.’ These same five aggregates of clinging, to which he becomes engaged and to which he clings, lead to his harm and suffering for a long time.
“He understands as it really is conditioned form as ‘conditioned form’ … conditioned consciousness as ‘conditioned consciousness. ’
“He understands as it really is murderous form as ‘murderous form’ … murderous consciousness as ‘murderous consciousness.’
“He does not become engaged with form, cling to it, and take a stand upon it as ‘my self.’ He does not become engaged with feeling … with perception … with volitional formations … with consciousness, cling to it, and take a stand upon it as ‘my self.’ These same five aggregates of clinging, to which he does not become engaged and to which he does not cling, lead to his welfare and happiness for a long time.”
We can say that "these same five aggregates of clinging" can bring happiness if not clung to. Again to counter that view that there's Dukkha even when the escape is found (the only except is the painful bodily feelings of the body, which is past kamma and cannot be avoided, but it is not there all the time and arahants can even kill themselves if it is unbearable)
What are the aggregates? All material form in the past, future, or present, inward or outward, gross or subtle, excellent or inferior, far
or near, is all collectively called the aggregate of material form; and similarly, feeling, perception, activities, and consciousness: all are
collectively called the aggregate of feeling, of perception, of activities, and of consciousness. These are called the aggregates.

What are the aggregates with attachment? If material form is accompanied by influxes, is [associated with] attachment; if that
form, in the past, future, or present, gives rise to sensual desire, anger, ignorance, and various other distressing mental phenomena
;
and similarly for feeling, perception, activities, and consciousness; these are called the aggregates with attachment.
This really explains what the liberation of the Buddha entails and what doesn't. We don't have to liberate ourselves from the aggregates, but from identity and attachment to them so that dukkha is seen as not arising from them and we can see the cessation of Dukkha in action and experience happiness (The arahant is happy) and welfare in the midst of impermanence due to non-attachment and the cessation of identity. If we think that the aggregates are Dukkha even without attachment, we go against the teachings failing to see the escape and the happiness that we can experience. In brief, the clinging-aggregates are Dukkha and not the aggregates per se, since there's the escape from all the fire and it is visible, personally knowable by the wise. From DN9:
"I teach the Dhamma for the abandoning of the gross acquisition of a self… the mind-made acquisition of a self… the formless acquisition of a self such that, when you practice it, defiling mental qualities will be abandoned, bright mental qualities will grow, and you will enter & remain in the culmination & abundance of discernment, having known & realized it for yourself in the here & now. If the thought should occur to you that, when defiling mental qualities are abandoned and bright mental qualities have grown, and one enters & remains in the culmination & abundance of discernment, having known & realized it for oneself in the here & now, one's abiding (note: so one experience) is stressful/painful, you should not see it in that way. When defiling mental qualities are abandoned and bright mental qualities have grown, and one enters & remains in the culmination & abundance of discernment, having known & realized it for oneself in the here & now, there is joy, rapture, serenity, mindfulness, alertness, and a pleasant/happy abiding."
- As a side-note: Buddhadasa makes three distinctions: "mere" aggregates (totality of experience), clinging-aggregates and "pure" aggregates (aggregates that were clung to and now are no more clung to) :jumping: btw one word is important here: for him the "pure aggregates" are what remains (he talks a little and then choose to use this verb instead) after the removal of clinging. As a description, I dunno, but as a teaching that I think is very in-line with the suttas. The very same "clinging-aggregates" not clung to, leads to welfare and happiness.
'When one is free from passion, desire, love, thirst, fever, & craving for form, then with any change & alteration in that form, there does not arise any sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, or despair. When one is free from passion… for feeling… for perception… for fabrications… When one is free from passion, desire, love, thirst, fever, & craving for consciousness, then with any change & alteration in that consciousness, there does not arise any sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, or despair.
- To make my case one last time, here we can see that the aggregates can be stressful only if clung to:
[The Buddha:] "Mahāli, if form were exclusively stressful — followed by stress, infused with stress and not infused with pleasure — beings would not be infatuated with form. But because form is also pleasurable — followed by pleasure, infused with pleasure and not infused with stress — beings are infatuated with form. Through infatuation, they are captivated. Through captivation, they are defiled. This is the cause, this the requisite condition, for the defilement of beings (note: and, it should be clear now, even of their suffering). And this is how beings are defiled with cause, with requisite condition.

"If feeling were exclusively stressful…

"If perception were exclusively stressful…

"If fabrications were exclusively stressful…

"If consciousness were exclusively stressful — followed by stress, infused with stress and not infused with pleasure — beings would not be infatuated with consciousness. But because consciousness is also pleasurable — followed by pleasure, infused with pleasure and not infused with stress — beings are infatuated with consciousness. Through infatuation, they are captivated. Through captivation, they are defiled. This is the cause, this the requisite condition, for the defilement of beings. And this is how beings are defiled with cause, with requisite condition."

"And what, lord, is the cause, what the requisite condition, for the purification of beings? How are beings purified with cause, with requisite condition?"

"Mahāli, if form were exclusively pleasurable — followed by pleasure, infused with pleasure and not infused with stress — beings would not be disenchanted with form. But because form is also stressful — followed by stress, infused with stress and not infused with pleasure — beings are disenchanted with form. Through disenchantment, they grow dispassionate. Through dispassion, they are purified. This is the cause, this the requisite condition, for the purification of beings. And this is how beings are purified with cause, with requisite condition.
Here we have the Arahant, a purified being (I think that this is the passage Buddhadasa entails), that experience the aggregates without infatuation and without being held captive from them and, by observing the clinging-aggregates actually makes himself happy as in the attending-sutta quoted by you. The aggregates are the same, the danger is there as usual, but the Dukkha is cessated and cannot arise in the future because the escape is practiced even while they are still there, making us pure and safe and without the Dukkha of the first noble truth

With Metta!
User avatar
Noble Sangha
Posts: 94
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2021 5:27 pm

Re: Dependent Origination, Dukkha and Rebirth

Post by Noble Sangha »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 5:01 pm
It would help if you used the quote function to reply to people. It makes for an easier read, and the person also gets a notification when you have replied.
Okay thank you for the suggestion, will keep in mind and try to attempt.
What I mean by that is that the suttas record Arahants meditating on the 5 grasping aggregates.
I must have misunderstood you then.
Dhammapardon wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 9:35 pm
I would like to attempt an understanding at the above stated with your help.
Hi Dhammapardon, may you and all of us living beings be and stay well. I'll do my best to help . . . but can you first please clarify your questions? For instance . . .
If I understand right, upadana from pancupadanakkhandha but still namarupa experiences pancakkhandha?
I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to ask here by the whole sentence, but I'll try to answer however that I can understand your question.

Upadana is from pancupadanakkhandha and the Akusala-Mula Paticca Samuppada cycle.

The English word "experiences" being used in your context can be too vague without additional information. I could say Paticca samuppada or all it's steps describes how we experience the world or pancakkhandha.
(I use namarupa as the human body and mind complex)
Based on how you use namarupa and to keep things simple, then yes namarupa "plays a role" in experiencing the pancakkhandha".
When me/mine & not me/not mine is rightly understood and experienced, almost everything is same as before, but understood by the experiencer as not me/not mine? Still eyes apprehend things, intellect perceives things, and namarupa experiences taṇhā but no longer MY taṇhā, just taṇhā in namarupa?
What living being are you mentioning here?

a) Arahant
b) An ariya not an arahant yet
c) ordinary person
d) other (explain)

I'm guessing that you're most likely mentioning an arahant here? But would like you to confirm or clarify.

It would make things easier and more beneficial if we are able to explain, answer or ask questions as concise and precise as possible.
I am a Buddhist that doesn't practice Buddhism. What I practice is nekkhamma, abyāpāda, avihiṁsā, viraga, nirodha or the Noble Eight Fold Path. The elimination / eradication / extermination of defilements, kilesa's, raga, dosa, moha and asava's.

Lineage: Buddha > Sthaviravada > Vibhajjavada > Theravada > Striving for Nibbana.
Dhammapardon
Posts: 373
Joined: Mon May 09, 2022 12:11 am

Re: Dependent Origination, Dukkha and Rebirth

Post by Dhammapardon »

Noble Sangha wrote: Tue Dec 06, 2022 6:21 am I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to ask here by the whole sentence, but I'll try to answer however that I can understand your question.
Thank you for your response venerable.

Upon further examination, it appears I missed you had answered the question in a following line of your previous post.

The question was raised:
..how can tanhapaccaya upadanam step occur? And let's say if tanhapaccaya upadanam step doesn't occur for an Arahant or the Buddha, then how can they be experiencing or initiating the pancupadanakkhandha or the 5 clinging aggregates?
You then go on to say
it's more accurate to say that they "don't cling to the 5 aggregates or NO MORE UPADANA FOR THE PANCAKKHANDHA)", but are still associated with pancakkhandha
Which I think answers the previous question posed. I don't recall my reasoning for misunderstanding the question had already been answered but I then went on to do my best to answer using my limited understanding of pali.
When me/mine & not me/not mine is rightly understood and experienced, almost everything is same as before, but understood by the experiencer as not me/not mine? Still eyes apprehend things, intellect perceives things, and namarupa experiences taṇhā but no longer MY taṇhā, just taṇhā in namarupa?
What living being are you mentioning here?

a) Arahant
b) An ariya not an arahant yet
c) ordinary person
d) other (explain)

I'm guessing that you're most likely mentioning an arahant here? But would like you to confirm or clarify.

It would make things easier and more beneficial if we are able to explain, answer or ask questions as concise and precise as possible.
I believe I meant the living being would be namarupa.

Namarupa's vinnyana experiences sankhara due to avijja and clings to them (upananda). This makes the aggregates pancupanandakkhandha.

While the arahant understands namarupa and the rest as not the arahant, this does not mean the arahant is not present. The arahant is still present and so the experience of the arahant is that of pancakkhandha as they have broken free of the upananda in the aggregates through cessation.
Just as a bird, wherever it goes, flies with its wings as its only burden; so too is he content with a set of robes to provide for his body and almsfood to provide for his hunger. Wherever he goes, he takes only his barest necessities along. This is how a monk is content.(DN11)
Dhammapardon
Posts: 373
Joined: Mon May 09, 2022 12:11 am

Re: Dependent Origination, Dukkha and Rebirth

Post by Dhammapardon »

Dhammapardon wrote: Tue Dec 06, 2022 7:14 am I believe I meant the living being would be namarupa.

Namarupa's vinnyana experiences sankhara due to avijja and clings to them (upananda). This makes the aggregates pancupanandakkhandha.

While the arahant understands namarupa and the rest as not the arahant, this does not mean the arahant is not present. The arahant is still present and so the experience of the arahant is that of pancakkhandha as they have broken free of the upananda in the aggregates through cessation.
I want to add what I think is an important piece to this but can't edit so making a new post.

I did some digging and seems like...

Ignorance (avijja) of right use of(vasīkatā) body, speech, and mind (sankhara) leads to dukkha.
Whereas right view (sammaditthi) of right use of body, speech, and mind (sammāsaṅkappassa vasīkatā) leads to jhana and nirodha.

Here I mean actions of body, speech, and mind (kamma) are culminations of the volitional formations of sankhara.
Just as a bird, wherever it goes, flies with its wings as its only burden; so too is he content with a set of robes to provide for his body and almsfood to provide for his hunger. Wherever he goes, he takes only his barest necessities along. This is how a monk is content.(DN11)
User avatar
Noble Sangha
Posts: 94
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2021 5:27 pm

Re: Dependent Origination, Dukkha and Rebirth

Post by Noble Sangha »

Dhammapardon wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 9:35 pm
If I understand right, upadana from pancupadanakkhandha but still namarupa experiences pancakkhandha?
(I use namarupa as the human body and mind complex)
When me/mine & not me/not mine is rightly understood and experienced, almost everything is same as before, but understood by the experiencer as not me/not mine? Still eyes apprehend things, intellect perceives things, and namarupa experiences taṇhā but no longer MY taṇhā, just taṇhā in namarupa? The being has withdrawn (upadana) from the namarupa as theirs, as them. Now understands them as not theirs, not them. :reading:
Hi Dhammapardon

You mentioned "When me/mine & not me/mine is rightly understood and experience.

To me, based on your writing context, there's two types of people that could fall into the category of what you mentioned that I quoted.

Category A. Arahants

Category B. Sotapanna's, sakadagami's, anagami's.

"rightly understood and experience" is too vague for me to come to definite conclusions.
almost everything is same as before, but understood by the experiencer as not me/not mine
Depends on who you are implying, A or B or both with explanation and clarification.
"Still eyes apprehend things, intellect perceives things"

Yes . . .
namarupa experiences taṇhā but no longer MY taṇhā, just taṇhā in namarupa?
(I use namarupa as the human body and mind complex)
Let's say based on your definition of namarupa "human body and mind complex" how can the namarupa experience tanha as no longer my tanha? Because the tanha is in the namarupa? So one has tanha (attachments) but it's no longer my tanha (my attachments)? Do you think you can explain this to me and most importantly convince yourself that whatever your explaining makes sense? Especially if you combine your explanation with the Akusala-Mula Paticca Samuppada steps.

For your consideration,

What I have come to see / know is that the different teachings of the Buddha dhamma are all interconnected. (Ex. 4 Noble Truths, Anicca, Dukkha, Anatta, Paticca Samuppada, Abhidhamma, and so on . . .) It's teaching the same thing in different ways, as well different styles / materials for different learners. What I mean by interconnected, is like different pieces of puzzle coming together to complete the puzzle or picture. These pieces can help ones understanding of the other pieces (teachings) and the complete picture. When the picture is not complete and while one is trying to find the proper/right (view) pieces to complete the picture, we can use these pieces to verify / scrutinize other pieces that "we believe" is actually part of the picture. This helps one to ensure what we're learning or explaining is actually consistent and backed up by the other dhamma teachings.

Back to
"namarupa experiences taṇhā but no longer MY taṇhā, just taṇhā in namarupa?"
Category A would experience no tanha since they have completely eliminated / eradicate all defilements or asava's and other teachings on "defilements". Even though the word "defilements", "tanha" sound so simple, it can be analyzed / explained in wider and deeper ways. For example . . . Next two paragraphs C&P from learning material's that I learn from.

"There are 7 types of anusaya: ditthānusaya (wrong views), vicikiccānusaya (tendency to do the unwise), kāmarāgaanusaya (temptation for sense pleasures), paṭigha anusaya (temptation for hatred), bhvarāganusaya (craving for existence), mānanusaya (sense of “me”), and avijjānusaya (ignorance)"

"Āsava are four main types: ditthāsāva (diṭṭhi āsava), kāmāsava (kāma āsava), bhavāsava (bhava āsava), and avijjāsava (avijjā āsava)"

Combining with the 3 types of tanha from the 2nd noble truth, I hope you and others can see how wide and deep the words "defilement" or "tanha" can be.

Now for Category B, yes we could say "namarupa experiences tanha". As for "tanha in namarupa", yes we could say "tanha in namarupa" since (anusaya, asava's, 2nd noble truth "tanha", and others . . .) are associated with any living beings below Arahant stage. We could also say that any living being besides category A has "tanha in namarupa"

***IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND​​​***

ONE'S (DEFILEMENTS) ASAVA, ANUSAYA, GATI (Defiled characteristics / samsaric habits / likes / dislikes) "AUTOMATICALLY" GIVE RISE TO TANHA when "phassa" (contact) or more accurately when Samphassa (contact with defilements) is made. Also important to understand that not everything we make phassa (contact) with is defiled.
Namarupa's vinnyana experiences sankhara due to avijja and clings to them (upananda). This makes the aggregates pancupanandakkhandha.
Vinnana is the link between nama and rupa or nama-rupa :)

Try this . . . phassa, sankhara, vinnana, and other's help construct the namarupa's experience and due the living being (namarupa) avija, tanha, upadana, the aggregates are clung too.
The being has withdrawn (upadana) from the namarupa as theirs, as them. Now understands them as not theirs, not them.
No chance for me to completely understand what your trying to say here. It can mean so many different things to me.
Here I mean actions of body, speech, and mind (kamma) are culminations of the volitional formations of sankhara.
They are mano sankhara (mind), vaci sankhara (speech, or thinking in one's mind), kaya sankhara (actions with the body)
Ignorance (avijja) of right use of(vasīkatā) body, speech, and mind (sankhara) leads to dukkha.
Yes, that "sankhara" is "abhisankhara".
Whereas right view (sammaditthi) of right use of body, speech, and mind (sammāsaṅkappassa vasīkatā) leads to jhana and nirodha
Yes, no, not necessary. Understanding that there are two Noble 8 Fold Paths, one mundane and the other transcendental and the differences between them would help understanding my answer. I shared a quick introduction on the two Noble 8 Fold Paths and how the 3 marks of existence is unified with the Noble 8 Fold Path in the following post:

viewtopic.php?p=683722#p683722

I hope this helps . . .
I am a Buddhist that doesn't practice Buddhism. What I practice is nekkhamma, abyāpāda, avihiṁsā, viraga, nirodha or the Noble Eight Fold Path. The elimination / eradication / extermination of defilements, kilesa's, raga, dosa, moha and asava's.

Lineage: Buddha > Sthaviravada > Vibhajjavada > Theravada > Striving for Nibbana.
Dhammapardon
Posts: 373
Joined: Mon May 09, 2022 12:11 am

Re: Dependent Origination, Dukkha and Rebirth

Post by Dhammapardon »

Noble Sangha wrote: Thu Dec 08, 2022 4:15 am I hope this helps . . .
This will take me a good while to fully understand but I will work diligently on it. I have a lot of respect for your dedication and detailed examinations in your posts and have great gratitude for the time taken to respond to mine. :anjali:
Just as a bird, wherever it goes, flies with its wings as its only burden; so too is he content with a set of robes to provide for his body and almsfood to provide for his hunger. Wherever he goes, he takes only his barest necessities along. This is how a monk is content.(DN11)
Cashews
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2022 3:42 am

Re: Dependent Origination, Dukkha and Rebirth

Post by Cashews »

Noble Sangha wrote: Thu Dec 08, 2022 4:15 am Let's say based on your definition of namarupa "human body and mind complex" how can the namarupa experience tanha as no longer my tanha? Because the tanha is in the namarupa? So one has tanha (attachments) but it's no longer my tanha (my attachments)?
Tanha is not attachments (upadana). Tanha (craving) is something attached to. Refer to MN 148 & SN 12.12.
‘The six classes of craving should be understood.’
‘Cha taṇhākāyā veditabbā’ti—

MN 148
“But sir, who craves?”

“That’s not a fitting question,” said the Buddha.

“I don’t speak of one who craves. If I were to speak of one who craves, then it would be fitting to ask who craves. But I don’t speak like that. Hence it would be fitting to ask: ‘What is a condition for craving?’ And a fitting answer to this would be: ‘Feeling is a condition for craving. Craving is a condition for grasping.’”

“But sir, who grasps?”

“That’s not a fitting question,” said the Buddha.

“I don’t speak of one who grasps. If I were to speak of one who grasps, then it would be fitting to ask who grasps. But I don’t speak like that. Hence it would be fitting to ask: ‘What is a condition for grasping?’ And a fitting answer to this would be: ‘Craving is a condition for grasping. Grasping is a condition for continued existence.’ … That is how this entire mass of suffering originates.

SN 12.2
Noble Sangha wrote: Thu Dec 08, 2022 4:15 amThey are mano sankhara (mind), vaci sankhara (speech, or thinking in one's mind), kaya sankhara (actions with the body)

Yes, that "sankhara" is "abhisankhara".
Only in Abhidhamma but not in Sutta and not in Paṭisambhidāmagga/Cūḷaniddesa. In SN 12.2, there is no mano sankhara. In SN 12.51, abhisankhara is upadana (anabhisaṅkharonto anabhisañcetayanto na kiñci loke upādiyati). In Cūḷaniddesa, abhisankhara is bhava (Katamo kammabhavo? Puññābhisaṅkhāro apuññābhisaṅkhāro āneñjābhisaṅkhāro— ayaṁ kammabhavo). In Paṭisambhidāmagga, bhava is intention (cetanā bhavo; Ps 1.1 Ñāṇakathā).
Dhammapardon wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 9:35 pm When me/mine & not me/not mine is rightly understood and experienced, almost everything is same as before, but understood by the experiencer as not me/not mine? Still eyes apprehend things, intellect perceives things, and namarupa experiences taṇhā but no longer MY taṇhā, just taṇhā in namarupa? The being has withdrawn (upadana) from the namarupa as theirs, as them. Now understands them as not theirs, not them.
Enlightening. :anjali:
Post Reply