32 marks of great man vs 32 parts of body meditation

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
SarathW
Posts: 21227
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: 32 marks of great man vs 32 parts of body meditation

Post by SarathW »

If I am not wrong, that the 32 marks of great man and 32 body parts are pre Buddhist ideas.
Perhaps we can have a better idea bout this from Hinduism.
:shrug:
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
pegembara
Posts: 3465
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:39 am

Re: 32 marks of great man vs 32 parts of body meditation

Post by pegembara »

Bundokji wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 10:12 pm Does anyone know what is repulsive about head hair? Had it been repulsive, then all the nonsense muslims do about women covering their hair would be a complete waste of time, let alone Buddhist monastics (men and women) who shave their heads for reasons that has little to do with beautifying themselves.
Take a look at Instagram, Facebook, fashion magazines, reality TV shows, etc. The one glaringly obvious item is the obsession with the attractiveness of the body. Covering up is just like trying to avoid the underlying tendency of people to be attracted to the body. It just means the underlying attraction to the body is still there! A mere suppression rather than true seeing as it were.

The thing is the the body is not inherently beautiful on its own.
If you stop washing and cutting your hair and let it grow unkempt ...
Letting you nails grow...
Not brushing your teeth...
Not washing your body...

Look beneath the skin you notice that 'beauty' is only skin deep. In fact, beauty isn't even skin deep!

That was one of the realization of the layman Yasa after a night of debauchery with courtesans.
Yasa was a bhikkhu during the time of Gautama Buddha. He was the sixth bhikkhu in the Buddha’s sangha and was the sixth to achieve arahanthood. Yasa lived in the 6th century BCE in what is now Uttar Pradesh and Bihar in northern India. Yasa was raised in Varanasi in a life of luxury. His father was wealthy. The family home was full of servants, musicians and dancers who catered for the family’s needs and entertainment.

One day, when he had become a young man, Yasa awoke early and saw his female servants and entertainers asleep in a repulsive state. Disgusted by the spectacle, Yasa realized the vanity of worldly life, and left the family home muttering “Distressed am I, oppressed am I” and journeyed in the direction of Isipatana where the Buddha was temporarily residing after his first five bhikkhus had attained arahanthood. This was five days after all of the first five bhikkhus had attained arahanthood.

The Buddha was pacing up and down in an open space near where Yasa was muttering “Distressed am I, oppressed am I”, and called Yasa over to him, inviting him to sit down. Yasa took off his golden sandals, saluted and sat down. The Buddha gave a dharma discourse, and Yasa achieved the first stage of arahanthood, sotapanna.

Yasa’s mother had noticed her son’s absence, and notified her husband, who sent horsemen in four directions to search for Yasa. Yasa’s father headed in the direction of Isipatana, following the trail left by the golden slippers. When the millionaire saw the Buddha and asked him if he had seen Yasa, the Buddha asked him to sit down, and then delivered a dharma talk.
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.
SarathW
Posts: 21227
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: 32 marks of great man vs 32 parts of body meditation

Post by SarathW »

pegembara wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 2:12 am
Bundokji wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 10:12 pm Does anyone know what is repulsive about head hair? Had it been repulsive, then all the nonsense muslims do about women covering their hair would be a complete waste of time, let alone Buddhist monastics (men and women) who shave their heads for reasons that has little to do with beautifying themselves.
Take a look at Instagram, Facebook, fashion magazines, reality TV shows, etc. The one glaringly obvious item is the obsession with the attractiveness of the body. Covering up is just like trying to avoid the underlying tendency of people to be attracted to the body. It just means the underlying attraction to the body is still there! A mere suppression rather than true seeing as it were.

The thing is the the body is not inherently beautiful on its own.
If you stop washing and cutting your hair and let it grow unkempt ...
Letting you nails grow...
Not brushing your teeth...
Not washing your body...


Look beneath the skin you notice that 'beauty' is only skin deep. In fact, beauty isn't even skin deep!

That was one of the realization of the layman Yasa after a night of debauchery with courtesans.
Yasa was a bhikkhu during the time of Gautama Buddha. He was the sixth bhikkhu in the Buddha’s sangha and was the sixth to achieve arahanthood. Yasa lived in the 6th century BCE in what is now Uttar Pradesh and Bihar in northern India. Yasa was raised in Varanasi in a life of luxury. His father was wealthy. The family home was full of servants, musicians and dancers who catered for the family’s needs and entertainment.

One day, when he had become a young man, Yasa awoke early and saw his female servants and entertainers asleep in a repulsive state. Disgusted by the spectacle, Yasa realized the vanity of worldly life, and left the family home muttering “Distressed am I, oppressed am I” and journeyed in the direction of Isipatana where the Buddha was temporarily residing after his first five bhikkhus had attained arahanthood. This was five days after all of the first five bhikkhus had attained arahanthood.

The Buddha was pacing up and down in an open space near where Yasa was muttering “Distressed am I, oppressed am I”, and called Yasa over to him, inviting him to sit down. Yasa took off his golden sandals, saluted and sat down. The Buddha gave a dharma discourse, and Yasa achieved the first stage of arahanthood, sotapanna.

Yasa’s mother had noticed her son’s absence, and notified her husband, who sent horsemen in four directions to search for Yasa. Yasa’s father headed in the direction of Isipatana, following the trail left by the golden slippers. When the millionaire saw the Buddha and asked him if he had seen Yasa, the Buddha asked him to sit down, and then delivered a dharma talk.
Wow.
This is dramatic.
Just imagine the miss universe do this.
How many men still seeks her?
Unless someone is very creative.
We wash the food and still eat them.
:D
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
pegembara
Posts: 3465
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:39 am

Re: 32 marks of great man vs 32 parts of body meditation

Post by pegembara »

SarathW wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 2:57 am Wow.
This is dramatic.
Just imagine the miss universe do this.
How many men still seeks her?
Unless someone is very creative.
We wash the food and still eat them.
:D
Or imagine if you were blind from birth.
What is beauty to you?
What are hair, nails, and teeth? Earth element
What is inside the so-called 'body'? Earth, water, fire, and wind elements
In fact what is inside and what is outside?
What is age to your?
What is ethnicity?

What do the 32 marks or 32 parts even mean?

As you can 'see', this attractiveness and repulsiveness of the body is largely due to seeing/sights.
"The eye is burning, forms are burning, eye-consciousness is burning, eye-contact is burning, also whatever is felt as pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant that arises with eye-contact for its indispensable condition, that too is burning. Burning with what? Burning with the fire of lust, with the fire of hate, with the fire of delusion. I say it is burning with birth, aging and death, with sorrows, with lamentations, with pains, with griefs, with despairs.
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.
SarathW
Posts: 21227
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: 32 marks of great man vs 32 parts of body meditation

Post by SarathW »

pegembara wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 7:37 am
SarathW wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 2:57 am Wow.
This is dramatic.
Just imagine the miss universe do this.
How many men still seeks her?
Unless someone is very creative.
We wash the food and still eat them.
:D
Or imagine if you were blind from birth.
What is beauty to you?
What are hair, nails, and teeth? Earth element
What is inside the so-called 'body'? Earth, water, fire, and wind elements
In fact what is inside and what is outside?
What is age to your?
What is ethnicity?

What do the 32 marks or 32 parts even mean?

As you can 'see', this attractiveness and repulsiveness of the body is largely due to seeing/sights.
"The eye is burning, forms are burning, eye-consciousness is burning, eye-contact is burning, also whatever is felt as pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant that arises with eye-contact for its indispensable condition, that too is burning. Burning with what? Burning with the fire of lust, with the fire of hate, with the fire of delusion. I say it is burning with birth, aging and death, with sorrows, with lamentations, with pains, with griefs, with despairs.
Good point.
But when we do not have the eye we cling via the ear and sound etc.
Then we are clinging by the mind to Deva and Brahma worlds.
The last we clinging to the mind by views.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Bundokji
Posts: 6494
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 11:57 pm

Re: 32 marks of great man vs 32 parts of body meditation

Post by Bundokji »

pegembara wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 2:12 am Take a look at Instagram, Facebook, fashion magazines, reality TV shows, etc. The one glaringly obvious item is the obsession with the attractiveness of the body. Covering up is just like trying to avoid the underlying tendency of people to be attracted to the body. It just means the underlying attraction to the body is still there! A mere suppression rather than true seeing as it were.

The thing is the the body is not inherently beautiful on its own.
If you stop washing and cutting your hair and let it grow unkempt ...
Letting you nails grow...
Not brushing your teeth...
Not washing your body...

Look beneath the skin you notice that 'beauty' is only skin deep. In fact, beauty isn't even skin deep!

That was one of the realization of the layman Yasa after a night of debauchery with courtesans.
Yasa was a bhikkhu during the time of Gautama Buddha. He was the sixth bhikkhu in the Buddha’s sangha and was the sixth to achieve arahanthood. Yasa lived in the 6th century BCE in what is now Uttar Pradesh and Bihar in northern India. Yasa was raised in Varanasi in a life of luxury. His father was wealthy. The family home was full of servants, musicians and dancers who catered for the family’s needs and entertainment.

One day, when he had become a young man, Yasa awoke early and saw his female servants and entertainers asleep in a repulsive state. Disgusted by the spectacle, Yasa realized the vanity of worldly life, and left the family home muttering “Distressed am I, oppressed am I” and journeyed in the direction of Isipatana where the Buddha was temporarily residing after his first five bhikkhus had attained arahanthood. This was five days after all of the first five bhikkhus had attained arahanthood.

The Buddha was pacing up and down in an open space near where Yasa was muttering “Distressed am I, oppressed am I”, and called Yasa over to him, inviting him to sit down. Yasa took off his golden sandals, saluted and sat down. The Buddha gave a dharma discourse, and Yasa achieved the first stage of arahanthood, sotapanna.

Yasa’s mother had noticed her son’s absence, and notified her husband, who sent horsemen in four directions to search for Yasa. Yasa’s father headed in the direction of Isipatana, following the trail left by the golden slippers. When the millionaire saw the Buddha and asked him if he had seen Yasa, the Buddha asked him to sit down, and then delivered a dharma talk.
I am not sure if you believe what you say for the following reasons:

1- Naturalistic fallacy: this fallacy can be used for not renouncing the world. If Buddhists were to use such fallacy against those who claim samsara to be the law of nature, then they cannot use it to claim that the body is repulsive. Washing the body or teeth is akin to replacing an evil thought with a wholesome thought, or waiting to go to the bathroom to defecate or urinate is akin to suppressing an evil thought until a more healthy way is found to channel it. If such methods are recommended to deal with the mind, then how can it be unattractive in relation to the body considering that the body changes less frequently than the mind according to the teachings.

2- Generalizations: humans are not obsessed with the body all the time. Such obsessions are more common among middle aged men and women for the purposes of breeding/copulation, but much less in children or elders.

3- While beauty as a concept often relates to sexual attractiveness, it has other connotations. For example, internal body parts are indeed less attractive for the purposes of copulation, but they can be attractive in terms of eating other animals flesh. In fact, removing the outer skin before cooking an animal makes it more palatable.

In brief, whinging about the burden of washing the body, or presenting it as deceptive degenerates spirituality, especially when religions appeared with civilizations. Thanks Buddha that we can wash our bodies and keep them relatively clean. In fact, Buddhism as well as other religions seem to utilized cosmological hierarchies to encourage us to maintain the minimum requirements for good appearance and hygiene, such as depicting devas or higher beings to be disgusted with us (the higher - the more attractive - the cleaner), or as with the story of Suppabuddha the leper, who encountered the Buddha's teachings to be reborn in the heaven of the thirty three, surpassing other devas in beauty and rank.

My question about head hair was specific, and the controversy of covering it in relation to women in some religions, or the act of shaving it among ascetics including Buddhist monastics. In general, the act of covering creates values by blurring the line between the attractive and repulsive. The act of wearing clothes, is in part, hides what is underneath as potentially unattractive and at the same time infatuating. As such, the act of nakedness can symbolize renunciation (as with jain monastics) or seductive (as in the case of hedonism).
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.
Bundokji
Posts: 6494
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 11:57 pm

Re: 32 marks of great man vs 32 parts of body meditation

Post by Bundokji »

To put it differently. Is it not strange that the Buddha included the brain in bone marrow as one unit and divided hair into head hair and body hair?
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.
justindesilva
Posts: 2602
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2016 12:38 pm

Re: 32 marks of great man vs 32 parts of body meditation

Post by justindesilva »

Bundokji wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 2:04 pm To put it differently. Is it not strange that the Buddha included the brain in bone marrow as one unit and divided hair into head hair and body hair?
a)
In a Pubmed magazine , under ncbi.nlm.nih.gov an article on transplant of bone marrow , it is explained that transplanted bone marrow , generates neurons in brain.

B) www.bodydetails.com explain that the hair on the head grows longer while the hair on other parts of the body do not grow long .
2600 years ago lord budda had described both items of bone marrow , and body hair with his divine eye . This shows that what ever lord budda is true and is not taken to be lightly .
justindesilva
Posts: 2602
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2016 12:38 pm

Re: 32 marks of great man vs 32 parts of body meditation

Post by justindesilva »

Bundokji wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 2:04 pm To put it differently. Is it not strange that the Buddha included the brain in bone marrow as one unit and divided hair into head hair and body hair?
a)
In a Pubmed magazine , under ncbi.nlm.nih.gov an article on transplant of bone marrow , it is explained that transplanted bone marrow , generates neurons in brain.

B) www.bodydetails.com explain that the hair on the head grows longer while the hair on other parts of the body do not grow long .
2600 years ago lord budda had described both items of bone marrow , and body hair with his divine eye . This shows that what ever lord budda is true and is not taken to be lightly .
Bundokji
Posts: 6494
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 11:57 pm

Re: 32 marks of great man vs 32 parts of body meditation

Post by Bundokji »

justindesilva wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 2:56 pm
Bundokji wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 2:04 pm To put it differently. Is it not strange that the Buddha included the brain in bone marrow as one unit and divided hair into head hair and body hair?
a)
In a Pubmed magazine , under ncbi.nlm.nih.gov an article on transplant of bone marrow , it is explained that transplanted bone marrow , generates neurons in brain.

B) www.bodydetails.com explain that the hair on the head grows longer while the hair on other parts of the body do not grow long .
2600 years ago lord budda had described both items of bone marrow , and body hair with his divine eye . This shows that what ever lord budda is true and is not taken to be lightly .
Thank you for your elaboration. I wonder if this is relevant to marks 24-25 of a great man:
24–25. One Hair Per Pore, and a Tuft

“Mendicants, in some past lives the Realized One was reborn as a human being. He refrained from lying. He spoke the truth and stuck to the truth. He was honest and trustworthy, and didn’t trick the world with his words. Due to performing those deeds he was reborn in a heavenly realm. When he came back to this state of existence he obtained these two marks: his hairs grow one per pore, and between his eyebrows there grows a tuft, soft and white like cotton-wool. One hair per pore, because his words of truth have only one meaning. Likewise, the tuft conveys purity and integrity.

Possessing these marks, if he stays at home he becomes a wheel-turning monarch. And what does he obtain as king? He has many close adherents among the brahmins and householders, people of town and country, treasury officials, military officers, guardsmen, ministers, counselors, rulers, tax beneficiaries, and princes. That’s what he obtains as king. And what does he obtain as Buddha? He has many close adherents among the monks, nuns, laymen, laywomen, gods, humans, demons, dragons, and centaurs. That’s what he obtains as Buddha.” The Buddha spoke this matter.

On this it is said:

“In past lives he was true to his promise, with no forked tongue, he shunned lies. He never broke his word to anyone, but spoke what was true, real, and factual.

A tuft so very white like cotton-wool grew prettily between his eyebrows. And never two, but only one, hair grew in each of his pores.

Many soothsayers learned in marks and expert in signs gathered and prophesied: ‘One like this, with tuft and hair so prominent, will have many as his close adherents.

Even as householder many people will follow him, due to the power of deeds in the past. But once gone forth, owning nothing, as Buddha the people will follow him.’”
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.
User avatar
frank k
Posts: 2247
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:55 pm
Contact:

Re: 32 marks of great man vs 32 parts of body meditation

Post by frank k »

Bundokji wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 9:42 pm
frank k wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 9:12 pm There are 31 body parts, not 32.
Count it.
LBT Theravada added the brain as #32.
In the suttas, it's 31.
I guess it depends if one considers Khp canonical. I also can't help but wonder why the missing (or the controversial) organ has to be the brain - an organ that can be viewed as one unit or as two halves. According to wikipedia, the Visuddhimagga suggests the enumeration of the 31 body parts implicitly includes the brain in aṭṭhimiñjaṃ, which is traditionally translated as "bone marrow".

If you search for 31 body parts digitally in the pāḷi canon, we get about 26 hits, and only one of them has the brain added,
the Kp you referenced.
On top of that, not all the Theravadan canons agree on matthaluṅganti (brain) being added to the list.

So the answer is no, it's not canonical. It's an LBT addition.

So if people respect the Elders (Thera), then we should respect that it's 31 body parts, not 32 that the later "elders" added to the list of 31.

Results for: (26 hits)
kesā lomā nakhā
Vin: 0
DN: 2
MN: 6
SN: 3
AN: 2
KN: 4
Abhi: 8
Visuddhi: 1
AbhiS: 0
Byā: 0
Añña: 0



KN Kh.p., 3. dvattiṃsākāro (KN 1.3), para. 7 ⇒

assu vasā kheḷo siṅghāṇikā lasikā muttanti {muttaṃ, matthake matthaluṅganti (syā.)} .
www.lucid24.org/sted : ☸Lucid24.org🐘 STED definitions
www.audtip.org/audtip: 🎙️🔊Audio Tales in Pāli: ☸Dharma and Vinaya in many languages
pegembara
Posts: 3465
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:39 am

Re: 32 marks of great man vs 32 parts of body meditation

Post by pegembara »

Bundokji wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 12:34 pm 1- Naturalistic fallacy: this fallacy can be used for not renouncing the world. If Buddhists were to use such fallacy against those who claim samsara to be the law of nature, then they cannot use it to claim that the body is repulsive. Washing the body or teeth is akin to replacing an evil thought with a wholesome thought, or waiting to go to the bathroom to defecate or urinate is akin to suppressing an evil thought until a more healthy way is found to channel it. If such methods are recommended to deal with the mind, then how can it be unattractive in relation to the body considering that the body changes less frequently than the mind according to the teachings.

2- Generalizations: humans are not obsessed with the body all the time. Such obsessions are more common among middle aged men and women for the purposes of breeding/copulation, but much less in children or elders.

3- While beauty as a concept often relates to sexual attractiveness, it has other connotations. For example, internal body parts are indeed less attractive for the purposes of copulation, but they can be attractive in terms of eating other animals flesh. In fact, removing the outer skin before cooking an animal makes it more palatable.

In brief, whinging about the burden of washing the body, or presenting it as deceptive degenerates spirituality, especially when religions appeared with civilizations. Thanks Buddha that we can wash our bodies and keep them relatively clean. In fact, Buddhism as well as other religions seem to utilized cosmological hierarchies to encourage us to maintain the minimum requirements for good appearance and hygiene, such as depicting devas or higher beings to be disgusted with us (the higher - the more attractive - the cleaner), or as with the story of Suppabuddha the leper, who encountered the Buddha's teachings to be reborn in the heaven of the thirty three, surpassing other devas in beauty and rank.

My question about head hair was specific, and the controversy of covering it in relation to women in some religions, or the act of shaving it among ascetics including Buddhist monastics. In general, the act of covering creates values by blurring the line between the attractive and repulsive. The act of wearing clothes, is in part, hides what is underneath as potentially unattractive and at the same time infatuating. As such, the act of nakedness can symbolize renunciation (as with jain monastics) or seductive (as in the case of hedonism).
The point of the contemplation is not to develop aversion but to have a perception not beautiful regarding the body.
The body is 'beautiful' in the way that every parts works in harmony.
The point is to reduce the strong attachment to bodies in general.
When you were told to study hard, get a good job in order to have a comfortable life, don't you think its in order to take care of this body of yours?
When you are homeless and hungry, isn't it actually the body that is homeless and hungry?
Aging, sickness, death, separation all has connection with the body, no?

Your body is past kamma... it is a vehicle to further enjoy or put an end to the samsaric journey. Of course you do need to take care of it for this purpose. It is indeed a burden since you need to feed it all the time and that involves some killing.

Puttamansa Sutta: A Son's Flesh https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

"There are these four nutriments for the maintenance of beings who have come into being or for the support of those in search of a place to be born. Which four? Physical food, gross or refined; contact as the second, intellectual intention the third, and consciousness the fourth. These are the four nutriments for the maintenance of beings who have come into being or for the support of those in search of a place to be born.

"And how is physical food to be regarded? Suppose a couple, husband & wife, taking meager provisions, were to travel through a desert. With them would be their only baby son, dear & appealing. Then the meager provisions of the couple going through the desert would be used up & depleted while there was still a stretch of the desert yet to be crossed. The thought would occur to them, 'Our meager provisions are used up & depleted while there is still a stretch of this desert yet to be crossed. What if we were to kill this only baby son of ours, dear & appealing, and make dried meat & jerky. That way — chewing on the flesh of our son — at least the two of us would make it through this desert. Otherwise, all three of us would perish.' So they would kill their only baby son, loved & endearing, and make dried meat & jerky. Chewing on the flesh of their son, they would make it through the desert. While eating the flesh of their only son, they would beat their breasts, [crying,] 'Where have you gone, our only baby son? Where have you gone, our only baby son?' Now what do you think, monks: Would that couple eat that food playfully or for intoxication, or for putting on bulk, or for beautification?"
Where did the Buddha refer to the "marks of a great man"... it is instead the opposite
“For a long time, venerable sir, I have wanted to come to see the Blessed One, but I haven’t been fit enough to do so.”

“Enough, Vakkali! Why do you want to see this foul body? One who sees the Dhamma sees me; one who sees me sees the Dhamma. For in seeing the Dhamma, Vakkali, one sees me; and in seeing me, one sees the Dhamma.

https://suttacentral.net/sn22.87/en/bod ... ight=false
"Furthermore, the monk reflects on this very body from the soles of the feet on up, from the crown of the head on down, surrounded by skin and full of various kinds of unclean things: 'In this body there are head hairs, body hairs, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, tendons, bones, bone marrow, kidneys, heart, liver, pleura, spleen, lungs, large intestines, small intestines, gorge, feces, bile, phlegm, pus, blood, sweat, fat, tears, skin-oil, saliva, mucus, fluid in the joints, urine.' Just as if a sack with openings at both ends were full of various kinds of grain — wheat, rice, mung beans, kidney beans, sesame seeds, husked rice — and a man with good eyesight, pouring it out, were to reflect, 'This is wheat. This is rice. These are mung beans. These are kidney beans. These are sesame seeds. This is husked rice'; in the same way, the monk reflects on this very body from the soles of the feet on up, from the crown of the head on down, surrounded by skin and full of various kinds of unclean things: 'In this body there are head hairs, body hairs, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, tendons, bones, bone marrow, kidneys, heart, liver, pleura, spleen, lungs, large intestines, small intestines, gorge, feces, bile, phlegm, pus, blood, sweat, fat, tears, skin-oil, saliva, mucus, fluid in the joints, urine.' And as he remains thus heedful, ardent, & resolute, any memories & resolves related to the household life are abandoned, and with their abandoning his mind gathers & settles inwardly, grows unified & centered. This is how a monk develops mindfulness immersed in the body.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
What the Buddha's description? Foul, unclean ... isn't that same as repulsive?
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.
Joe.c
Posts: 1484
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2021 5:01 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: 32 marks of great man vs 32 parts of body meditation

Post by Joe.c »

One is talking about result of precepts, but confused.

The other talking about leave behind the sensual realm, but haven't even understood the fruit of precepts yet.

Totally miss the point. Won't get too far from that practice.
May you be relax, happy, comfortable and free of dukkhas from hearing true dhamma.
May you gain unshakable confidence in Buddha, Dhamma and (Ariya) Sangha.
Learn about Buddha/Dhamma Characters.
Bundokji
Posts: 6494
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 11:57 pm

Re: 32 marks of great man vs 32 parts of body meditation

Post by Bundokji »

pegembara wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 12:51 am The body is 'beautiful' in the way that every parts works in harmony.
What the Buddha's description? Foul, unclean ... isn't that same as repulsive?
I think what i quoted above from your input could be the crux of the matter. In the world, it happened that meaning is constructed through an interactive between universals and particulars, and that includes the body. If you agree, the question becomes: what sort of harmony are sought through developing the perception of repulsiveness?

The harmony of monks who contemplated the foulness of the body and took the knife afterwards?

The harmony of self hypnotism and equating it with insight?

The harmony of contemplating the 32 parts of body and watching porn afterwards?

The harmony of monks in the third council who asserted that the Buddha was so perfect that even his faeces was fragrant-smelling?

There seems to be some kind of harmony in seeing faeces repulsive for example, as eating it for example would be un-nutritious at best, and poisonous at worst. The other parts are less straightforward from that perspective.

Using Vakkali sutta as evidence of repulsiveness would be akin to shooting oneself in the foot, considering that his encounter with the Buddha of the "foul body" led him to his enlightenment.
"I tell you, friend, that it is not possible by traveling to know or see or reach a far end of the cosmos where one does not take birth, age, die, pass away, or reappear. But at the same time, I tell you that there is no making an end of suffering & stress without reaching the end of the cosmos. Yet it is just within this fathom-long body, with its perception & intellect, that I declare that there is the cosmos, the origination of the cosmos, the cessation of the cosmos, and the path of practice leading to the cessation of the cosmos."
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.
Bundokji
Posts: 6494
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 11:57 pm

Re: 32 marks of great man vs 32 parts of body meditation

Post by Bundokji »

Joe.c wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 1:39 am The other talking about leave behind the sensual realm, but haven't even understood the fruit of precepts yet.
Just in case this was in reference to me, i never talked about leaving behind the sensual realm. I tend to believe that any attempt to escape the sensual realm is futile, until proven otherwise.
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.
Post Reply