There is nothing there, without substance

Textual analysis and comparative discussion on early Buddhist sects and scriptures.
Pulsar
Posts: 2580
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: There is nothing there, without substance

Post by Pulsar »

PeterC86 wrote
Pulsar wrote In Flower vagga Buddha clearly says
Rupa in DO is a phenomenon.
That is what I am trying to explain in this topic; forms are phenomena; the elements are phenomena. How could they not be?
My Dear Peter, earlier you said according to SN 12.2 rupa is matter. I pointed out that it is an error by the sutta compiler of this particular sutta. Flower vagga and Radha Samyutta contradict SN 12.2.
Now you are saying forms are phenomena. But don't you see how SN 12.2 contradicts this by calling Form matter derived from the 4 great elements.
You are saying elements are also phenomena. What do you mean by elements here?
  • In the earliest Buddhism there were only 6 elements. Those being the six consciousness
Later sutta compilers (like in Bahudhatuka sutta) increased it up to 18 elements. Abhidhamma loves classification and elaboration.
The four primary elements earth, fire, water and air, are called (mahabhuta) in scripture. They make up matter but they are not constituents of our thoughts It is incorrect to call matter phenomena.
Earth, water, fire, and air don't make up mental images (Rupas), vedana, sanna or vinnana.
With love :candle:
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27827
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: There is nothing there, without substance

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings friend Pulsar,
Pulsar wrote: Sat Feb 10, 2024 12:42 pm Retro wrote
(I would suggest though that paticcasamuppada starts earlier, and comprises of ignorantly creating fabrications which "one" engages via phassa. A lot happens in arising before craving comes into the picture, as first you need something to crave.)
Is not craving inherent in the unenlightened? Is not ignorance a hallmark of the puthujjana? You write
A lot happens in arising before craving comes into the picture, as first you need something to crave.)
Is not craving inbuilt into the underlying tendencies? How do underlying tendencies form? These defiled underlying tendencies are not found in the Arahant. Theravada compilers overlooked this extremely important aspect of DO.
  • Scent pf past actions are found in the stored underlying tendencies and perfumes our current craving and intentions.
With Love :candle:
As you know, name (nama) comprises feeling, perception, intention, contact and attention.

That's quite a lot of mental factors involved in the derivation of forms! There is plenty of room for what you're labelling "underlying tendencies" to hide in there, under the cover of darkness afforded by avijja.

All the best.

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
retrofuturist
Posts: 27827
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: There is nothing there, without substance

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
retrofuturist wrote: Thu Feb 08, 2024 9:20 pm I think many Buddhists tend to think of anatta and anicca as "high" teachings to aspire to when really, they're pretty obvious. Any phenomena which can end (and they all do!) is neither self, nor permanent.

In that context, you'll note that the Noble Truths are dukkha, samudaya, nirodha and magga.... not dukkha, anicca, anatta and magga. Samudaya and nirodha are the two-fold mode of paticcasamuppada. That's where phenomena are truly understood for what they are.
retrofuturist wrote: Fri Feb 09, 2024 7:03 am You've set the bar for stream-entry just below omniscience. Good luck clearing it.
Ceisiwr wrote: Fri Feb 09, 2024 6:57 am Anatta is a teaching specific to Buddhas, so how is it “obvious”?
Since these comments were not rightly understood at the time by Ceisiwr, I am sharing these words from Thanissaro Bhikkhu...
One interpretation that’s currently widespread states that the Dhamma eye is simply the acceptance of the principle of impermanence or inconstancy: All things that arise must pass away. But there are many reasons, both contextual and textual, for not accepting this interpretation.

To begin with the contextual issues: What sort of experience would legitimately and naturally lead to that acceptance? You’d have to make a survey of all phenomena in the universe for the conclusion to legitimately apply to all phenomena. Anything short of that would simply be, in the words of MN 95, “an agreement through pondering views,” i.e., a conclusion based on ideas and observations that fit in with one another, but haven’t been universally tested. As the Buddha repeatedly said, the fact that a theory is coherent and consistent with a few facts is no guarantee that it’s true. So it’s hard to see that such a conclusion would, for him, count as an overcoming of doubt.

There’s also the question of why agreeing to the principle that everything that arises passes away would invariably lead to a tranquil, sorrowless state. I know of many people who, believing that meditation aims at a vision of the impermanence of all things, induce themselves to confirm that principle in their practice and then find the experience disturbing and disorienting.

So, in light of these contextual issues, it’s hard to accept that this is what the Dhamma eye sees.

As for the textual issues, it’s important to note that the formula for the Dhamma eye doesn’t make reference to “all that arises.” Instead, it speaks of “all that is subject to origination.” The difference is crucial. “Arising” is simply an issue of appearing. “Origination,” however, is an issue of causality: The Dhamma eye speaks of all that arises because of a cause.

But not just any cause: “Origination” is most often used throughout the Pali Canon to refer to processes where the cause is in one’s own mind. Given that the Dhamma eye most frequently follows on hearing the four noble truths, and given that the word “origination” in the context of those truths refers to the causes of stress within the mind—three types of craving—it follows naturally that anyone listening to these truths would naturally look for the causes of stress in his or her own mind.

So the formula for the Dhamma eye refers to what is seen when a listener does just that.
Well said Thanissaro Bhikkhu.

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
Rambutan
Posts: 702
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2021 6:35 pm

Re: There is nothing there, without substance

Post by Rambutan »

retrofuturist wrote: Mon Feb 12, 2024 12:49 am
these words from Thanissaro Bhikkhu...
What sort of experience would legitimately and naturally lead to that acceptance? You’d have to make a survey of all phenomena in the universe for the conclusion to legitimately apply to all phenomena.
birth, old age, sickness, death, for starters. And nothing in the universe can be found that is what it was yesterday. You can’t stand in the same river even once.
There’s also the question of why agreeing to the principle that everything that arises passes away would invariably lead to a tranquil, sorrowless state. I know of many people who, believing that meditation aims at a vision of the impermanence of all things, induce themselves to confirm that principle in their practice and then find the experience disturbing and disorienting.
“Agreeing to a principle” doesn’t count for much, and just knowing it is only part of the whole picture. A mere intellectual understanding isn’t sufficient, and trying to induce yourself to do anything via mediation totally misses the point of meditation. No wonder people get so messed up. The reason why impermanence feels threatening to people is ultimately due to self-grasping.
Saying “I’m impermanent” is very different than saying
“There is nothing permanent that is me.”
As for the textual issues, it’s important to note that the formula for the Dhamma eye doesn’t make reference to “all that arises.” Instead, it speaks of “all that is subject to origination.” The difference is crucial. “Arising” is simply an issue of appearing. “Origination,” however, is an issue of causality: The Dhamma eye speaks of all that arises because of a cause.
okay, name something that doesn’t
arise or originate without a cause.
But not just any cause: “Origination” is most often used throughout the Pali Canon to refer to processes where the cause is in one’s own mind. Given that the Dhamma eye most frequently follows on hearing the four noble truths, and given that the word “origination” in the context of those truths refers to the causes of stress within the mind—three types of craving—it follows naturally that anyone listening to these truths would naturally look for the causes of stress in his or her own mind.
Yes, that’s the point. Don’t cling to appearances that arise in the mind (they all originate there, btw). Why not? Because they are impermanent. If you cling to pleasure, you’ll suffer when the causes of the pleasure end. If you cling to suffering, you’ll suffer until thd causes of the suffering end.
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12653
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: There is nothing there, without substance

Post by cappuccino »

Rambutan wrote: Mon Feb 12, 2024 5:16 am okay, name something that doesn’t
arise or originate without a cause.
The unconditioned state
PeterC86
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2019 7:06 pm

Re: There is nothing there, without substance

Post by PeterC86 »

Pulsar wrote: Sun Feb 11, 2024 11:41 pm It is incorrect to call matter phenomena.
Greetings,

It seems that you need to read up on what the general consensus is on what the term phenomenon refers to in dictionaries.

Warm regards,
Peter
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27827
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: There is nothing there, without substance

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
Pulsar wrote: Sun Feb 11, 2024 11:41 pm It is incorrect to call matter phenomena.
PeterC86 wrote: Mon Feb 12, 2024 6:58 am what the term phenomenon refers to in dictionaries.
late 16th century: via late Latin from Greek phainomenon ‘thing appearing to view’, based on phainein ‘to show’.

It would appear Pulsar is correct, because friend Pulsar understands SN 47.42 and does not pervert its meaning.

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."
PeterC86
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2019 7:06 pm

Re: There is nothing there, without substance

Post by PeterC86 »

retrofuturist wrote: Mon Feb 12, 2024 7:06 am Greetings,
Pulsar wrote: Sun Feb 11, 2024 11:41 pm It is incorrect to call matter phenomena.
PeterC86 wrote: Mon Feb 12, 2024 6:58 am what the term phenomenon refers to in dictionaries.
late 16th century: via late Latin from Greek phainomenon ‘thing appearing to view’, based on phainein ‘to show’.
Greetings,

Maybe you can explain what your (and Pulsar's?) meaning of phenomenon is, because the different prominent dictionaries are all in agreement on what it refers to, so that we may understand your language.
It would appear Pulsar is correct, because friend Pulsar understands SN 47.42 and does not pervert its meaning.

Metta,
Paul. :)
Well the sutta explains that based upon name-and-form there is origination of mind, which is in accordance to what I said; it leads to conceiving.

Attention leads to the viewing of phenomena. When there is no attention, no phenomena are perceived; there is nothing shown to us.

The sutta doesn't say that name-and-form is the condition for phenomena.

So please explain how you think that the sutta somehow supports your view, also in relation to what phenomenon means, according to your language. Also please explain how this somehow opposes what I showed previously in this topic, with the referred suttas.

Warm regards,
Peter
Last edited by PeterC86 on Mon Feb 12, 2024 9:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27827
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: There is nothing there, without substance

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Peter,

I'm not sure what else there is to said. Phenomena's meaning is as per its etymology. It's the same as what we know and mean by the Pali word (lower case) "dhamma".

I assume Pulsar would agree on that point, but that's up to him ultimately. We seem to agree on matters of most significance, and differ mostly in terms of textual analysis where he seems to perceive more sectarian jiggery-pokery afoot in the Suttas themselves than I do.
Peter wrote:Attention leads to the viewing of phenomena. When there is no attention, no phenomena are perceived; there is nothing shown to us.
No. You're re-writing the Suttas, retrofitting your eisegesis into it. Do not brothelise your teacher's words. Take it as written, because if the Buddha wanted to say what you just said, that's what he would have said. Instead...
SN 47.42 wrote:“With the origination of attention there is the origination of phenomena. With the cessation of attention there is the passing away of phenomena.”
If you see in accordance with that, you may discern samudaya. If you keep "phenomena" separate from "attention", as your wording does, there is no chance to discern the idappaccayatā causality at play.

Without attention, there is no phenomena.

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."
PeterC86
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2019 7:06 pm

Re: There is nothing there, without substance

Post by PeterC86 »

retrofuturist wrote: Mon Feb 12, 2024 9:39 am Greetings Peter,

I'm not sure what else there is to said. Phenomena's meaning is as per its etymology. It's the same as what we know and mean by the Pali word (lower case) "dhamma".
Greetings,

Well as I said, all the different prominent dictionaries, and also most people on this forum for that matter, are all in agreement on what phenomenon means, but it seems that you and Pulsar are upholding a different meaning, so maybe you can elaborate on that meaning so that we may understand what phenomenon means to you (and Pulsar?).
I assume Pulsar would agree on that point, but that's up to him ultimately. We seem to agree on matters of most significance, and differ mostly in terms of textual analysis where he seems to perceive more sectarian jiggery-pokery afoot in the Suttas themselves than I do.
Peter wrote:Attention leads to the viewing of phenomena. When there is no attention, no phenomena are perceived; there is nothing shown to us.
No. You're re-writing the Suttas, retrofitting your eisegesis into it. Do not brothelise your teacher's words. Take it as written, because if the Buddha wanted to say what you just said, that's what he would have said. Instead...
SN 47.42 wrote:“With the origination of attention there is the origination of phenomena. With the cessation of attention there is the passing away of phenomena.”
Metta,
Paul. :)
Yes, I did this on purpose, to show how your meaning of phenomena, "per its etymology", applies to it. So if you say that it doesn't, you may now clear up how it, including the term phenomenon, should be understood, because the sutta is clear in that phenomena are not based upon name-and-form.

Warm regards,
Peter
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27827
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: There is nothing there, without substance

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Peter,
PeterC86 wrote: Mon Feb 12, 2024 9:57 am Well as I said, all the different prominent dictionaries, and also most people on this forum for that matter, are all in agreement on what phenomenon means, but it seems that you and Pulsar are upholding a different meaning, so maybe you can elaborate on that meaning so that we may understand what phenomenon means to you (and Pulsar?).
dhamma.

(Pulsar, do you know what he's talking about? :shrug: )
PeterC86 wrote: Mon Feb 12, 2024 9:57 amYes, I did this on purpose, to show how your meaning of phenomena, "per its etymology", applies to it. So if you say that it doesn't, you may now clear up how it, including the term phenomenon, should be understood, because the sutta is clear in that phenomena are not based upon name-and-form.
What do you think consciousness is of, Peter?
DN 15 wrote:Thus, Ānanda, with nama-rupa as condition there is vinnana; with vinnana as condition there is nama-rupa.
What do you think nama (name) comprises of, Peter?
SN 12.2 wrote:And what, bhikkhus, is name-and-form? Feeling, perception, volition, contact, attention: this is called name.
All the best.

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."
PeterC86
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2019 7:06 pm

Re: There is nothing there, without substance

Post by PeterC86 »

retrofuturist wrote: Mon Feb 12, 2024 10:07 am Greetings Peter,
PeterC86 wrote: Mon Feb 12, 2024 9:57 am Well as I said, all the different prominent dictionaries, and also most people on this forum for that matter, are all in agreement on what phenomenon means, but it seems that you and Pulsar are upholding a different meaning, so maybe you can elaborate on that meaning so that we may understand what phenomenon means to you (and Pulsar?).
dhamma.

(Pulsar, do you know what he's talking about? :shrug: )
PeterC86 wrote: Mon Feb 12, 2024 9:57 amYes, I did this on purpose, to show how your meaning of phenomena, "per its etymology", applies to it. So if you say that it doesn't, you may now clear up how it, including the term phenomenon, should be understood, because the sutta is clear in that phenomena are not based upon name-and-form.
What do you think consciousness is of, Peter?
DN 15 wrote:Thus, Ānanda, with nama-rupa as condition there is vinnana; with vinnana as condition there is nama-rupa.
What do you think nama (name) comprises of, Peter?
SN 12.2 wrote:And what, bhikkhus, is name-and-form? Feeling, perception, volition, contact, attention: this is called name.
All the best.

Metta,
Paul. :)
Greetings,

This all doesn't explain anything. Of course name is attention, hence phenomena (form) originate from attention, in that they are perceived/viewed/shown. Name is not form, and form is not name. Based upon the coming together of name and form, the mind originates, as explained in the sutta. So please clarify what phenomenon/dhamma means to you.

Warm regards,
Peter
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27827
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: There is nothing there, without substance

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Peter,
PeterC86 wrote: Mon Feb 12, 2024 10:36 amThis all doesn't explain anything.
It does actually. That's why the Buddha taught it.
PeterC86 wrote: Mon Feb 12, 2024 10:36 amOf course name is attention, hence phenomena (form) originate from attention
End your sentence there.
PeterC86 wrote: Mon Feb 12, 2024 10:36 amName is not form, and form is not name. Based upon the coming together of name and form, the mind originates, as explained in the sutta.
OK.
PeterC86 wrote: Mon Feb 12, 2024 10:36 amSo please clarify what phenomenon/dhamma means to you.
As above, what's left to be said? What more do you want?

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."
PeterC86
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2019 7:06 pm

Re: There is nothing there, without substance

Post by PeterC86 »

retrofuturist wrote: Mon Feb 12, 2024 10:50 am Greetings Peter,
PeterC86 wrote: Mon Feb 12, 2024 10:36 amThis all doesn't explain anything.
It does actually. That's why the Buddha taught it.
PeterC86 wrote: Mon Feb 12, 2024 10:36 amOf course name is attention, hence phenomena (form) originate from attention
End your sentence there.
PeterC86 wrote: Mon Feb 12, 2024 10:36 amName is not form, and form is not name. Based upon the coming together of name and form, the mind originates, as explained in the sutta.
OK.
PeterC86 wrote: Mon Feb 12, 2024 10:36 amSo please clarify what phenomenon/dhamma means to you.
As above, what's left to be said? What more do you want?

Metta,
Paul. :)
Greetings,

Well you are the one who is alluding to the claim that matter is somehow not appearing to us. I don't know what the heck you are talking about, and it doesn't make sense in a common sense way, it doesn't accord with the meaning of the term phenomenon in the prominent dictionaries, and it doesn't align with how the dhamma is explained in the different suttas I referred to across my posts in this topic, including SN 47.42. I am fine with that. Are you?

All the best.

Warm regards,
Peter
pegembara
Posts: 3413
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:39 am

Re: There is nothing there, without substance

Post by pegembara »

I’ve done your bidding everywhere, mind!
For many births, I’ve done nothing to upset you.
Yet the creation in myself is because of your ingratitude—
for a long time I’ve transmigrated
in the suffering you’ve made.
Only you, mind, make a brahmin;
you make an aristocrat or a royal seer.
Sometimes we become peasants or menials;
and life as a god is also on account of you.
You alone make us titans;
because of you we’re born in hell.
Then sometimes we become animals,
and life as a ghost is also on account of you.

Come what may, you won’t betray me again,
dazzling me with your ever-changing display!

You play with me like I’m mad—
but how have I ever failed you, mind?
In the past my mind wandered
how it wished, where it liked, as it pleased.
Now I’ll carefully guide it,
as a trainer with a hook guides a rutting elephant.
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.
Things have changed, mind!
Nothing could make me return to your control!
I’ve gone forth in the teaching of the great seer,
those like me don’t come to ruin.
Mountains, oceans, rivers, the earth;
the four quarters, the intermediate directions,
below and in the sky;
the three realms of existence
are all impermanent and troubled

where can you go to find happiness, mind?
Mind, what will you do to someone
who has made the ultimate commitment?
Nothing could make me a follower
under your control, mind;
I’d never touch a bellows
with a mouth open at each end;
curse this mortal frame flowing with nine streams!
You’ve ascended the mountain peak,
full of nature’s beauty,
frequented by boars and antelopes,
a grove sprinkled with fresh water in the rains;
and there you’ll be happy in your cave-home.
Peacocks with beautiful necks and crests,
colorful tail-feathers and wings,
crying out at the resounding thunder:
they’ll delight you as you meditate in the forest.
When the sky has rained down,
and the grass is four inches high,
and the grove is full of flowers like a cloud,
in the mountain cleft, like the fork of a tree, I’ll lie;
it will be as soft as cotton-buds.
I’ll act as a master does:
let whatever I get be enough for me.
And that’s why I’ll make you as supple
as a tireless worker makes a cat-skin bag.
I’ll act as a master does:
let whatever I get be enough for me.
I’ll control you with my energy,
as a skilled trainer controls an elephant with a hook.
Now that you’re well-tamed and reliable,
I can use you,
like a trainer uses a straight-running horse,
to practice the path so full of grace,
cultivated by those who take care of their minds.
I shall strongly fasten you to a meditation subject,
as an elephant is tied to a post with firm rope.
You’ll be well-guarded by me,
well-developed by mindfulness,
and unattached to rebirth in all states of existence.
You’ll use understanding
to cut the follower of the wrong path,
curb them by practice,
and settle them on the right path.
And when you have seen the cause of suffering
arise and pass away,
you’ll be an heir to the greatest teacher.
Under the sway of the four distortions, mind,
you dragged me around like a bull in a pit;
but now you won’t associate
with the great sage of compassion,
the cutter of fetters and bonds?
Like a deer roaming free in the colorful forest,
I’ll ascend the lovely mountain wreathed in cloud,
and rejoice to be on that hill, free of folk—
there is no doubt you’ll perish, mind.
The men and women who live
under your will and command,
whatever pleasure they experience,
they are ignorant and fall under Māra’s control;
loving life, they’re your disciples, mind.

https://suttacentral.net/thag19.1/en/su ... ript=latin
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.
Post Reply