equilibrium wrote: ↑Sun May 14, 2023 1:17 pm
The Buddha taught one truth and that is the taste of Nibbana. (4NT)
The word “hidden” is related to the condition itself ….. hence “hidden condition”….. because it isn’t obvious hence the truth reveals this.
The Buddha taught four noble truths of which nibbana is one. What makes nibbana "the truth" is desirability, especially when contrasted with the first two noble truths: suffering and its origin. How different is that from Brahmanism? Brahma or God is hidden from the world, but if the ambiguities of existence can be traced back to him, then we can be contented that not everything is within our control and let go of unnecessary suffering, only if. So, why it is not the same logic turned upon itself is not clear. To avoid such accusations, reference to historical events becomes necessary: it happened that the historical Buddha emerged when Brahmanism was dominant, hence any actions by the noble sangha that might resemble traces of Brahmanism must be systematically dismissed.
Here, once again, Ven. Sariputta comes to aid: any apparent crossing with Brahmanism is a misunderstanding, based on confusing appearances with what is hidden:
We are told in the Commentary to the Nava Sutta (Sutta-Nipata), and also in the Commentary to v. 392 of the Dhammapada, that whenever the Venerable Sariputta lived in the same monastery as the Elder Assaji, he always went to pay obeisance to him immediately after having done so to the Blessed One. This he did out of reverence, thinking: "This venerable one was my first teacher. It was through him that I came to know the Buddha's Dispensation." And when the Elder Assaji lived in another monastery, the Venerable Sariputta used to face the direction in which the Elder Assaji was living, and to pay homage to him by touching the ground at five places (with the head, hands and feet), and saluting with joined palms.
But this led to misunderstanding, for when other monks saw it they said: "After becoming a Chief Disciple, Sariputta still worships the heavenly quarters! Even today he cannot give up his brahmanical views!" Hearing these remarks, the Blessed One said: "It is not so, bhikkhus. Sariputta does not worship the heavenly quarters. He salutes him through whom he came to know the Dhamma. It is him he salutes, worships and reveres as his teacher. Sariputta is one who gives devout respect to his teacher." It was then that the Master preached to the monks assembled there the Nava Sutta,[9] which starts with the words:
"As gods their homage pay to Indra,
So should a man give reverence to him
From whom he learned the Dhamma."
If the Tathāgata is defined as "one who has thus gone", and if we were to apply this in time, then seeing or knowing the "hidden condition" and talking about it accurately/reliably has to be after extinguishment, which is not too different from the view of Brahmanism. If you ask most people who follow this line of thought, they would tell you that god (as a hidden cause/condition) can be known/seen after one is dead, in the afterlife.
Interesting how you label them as “transcendent type of memory” but could understand why but even if you know all of your previous lives, it doesn’t get you out of samsara does it? …. it takes right knowledge leading to right release…..not any type of knowledge, or rather this type of specific “transcendent memory”.
I label them as "transcendent type of memory" because it is by definition sort of thing. If mundane/ordinary memory is bound by birth and death, then the transcendent or supramundane quality of remembering past lives is through overcoming such limitations. And you are right: the utility of such knowledge is far from clear when it comes to insight or freedom from suffering as per DN1. One could imagine that if the majority of people possessed such power as remembering this past lives, they would behave, but how can we know for sure? In the suttas, there are devas who have more direct knowledge of rebirth that the average human, and yet, they can do all sorts of unskillful actions. On other instances, not remembering past lives is presented as a deficiency, as with the case of Baka.
There’s a difference between them because “not-self” is a realisation, part of the 4NT that reveals the truth. Saying not-self and knowing not-self are not the same thing here and is the dividing line between delusion and non-delusion. One has right knowledge leading to right release whereas the other doesn’t.
Illusion and real is the difference between trapped in samsara and awakened.
I wish things were as simple as you are presenting them. The implication of not-self is far reaching in relation to hierarchy and its applicability to meaning and truth. Again, the last five fetters imply that the Buddha dhamma is more inline with virtue, wisdom and concentration, but they are equally void, and as with Brahmanism, earth seems to be the most democratic substance of all. A down to earth approach to the differences between ordinary causality (or memory) and supramundane knowledge would show that the later is not the ultimate by virtue of being better.
Once the Venerable Anuruddha went to see the Venerable Sariputta. When they had exchanged courteous greetings he sat down and said to the Venerable Sariputta: "Friend Sariputta, with the divine eye that is purified, transcending human ken, I can see the thousandfold world-system. Firm is my energy, unremitting; my mindfulness is alert and unconfused; the body is tranquil and unperturbed; my mind is concentrated and one-pointed. And yet my mind is not freed from cankers, not freed from clinging."
"Friend Anuruddha," said the Venerable Sariputta, "that you think thus of your divine eye, this is conceit in you. That you think thus of your firm energy, your alert mindfulness, your unperturbed body and your concentrated mind, this is restlessness in you. That you think of your mind not being freed from the cankers, this is worrying[16] in you. It will be good, indeed, if the Venerable Anuruddha, abandoning these three states of mind and paying no attention to them, will direct the mind to the Deathless Element."
With some sympathy, just imagine someone who manage to break away from the ordinary: he would most likely view people as stupid, running around in circles, not able to see their own tragedy, going nowhere.
Again, it’s more of the reveal of the “condition”.
Words here do little justice.
The ability to use words is what the wise and the fool have in common. If the world is largely occupied by fools, then justice would consist of eliminating ambiguities as best as possible, rather than adding to them.
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.