How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Textual analysis and comparative discussion on early Buddhist sects and scriptures.
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by Pulsar »

Coemgenu wrote
do you think that "graying" and "wrinkling" do not refer to the physical body aging?
they are signs of physical aging. Where in the scripture does Buddha say he can stop the aging of the physical body?
The physical bodies of enlightened Arahants age and physically die, that is my understanding. Yet soteriologically Arahant is deathless.
With love :candle:
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by Coëmgenu »

He doesn't teach that the aging of physical bodies can be stopped. This point, however, has no relation to if the first aggregate is physical or not, nor does it have any relation to if the first base of mindfulness is the physical body or not. If the first aggregate were non-physical, it wouldn't change anything, and if the first base of mindfulness was not mindfulness of the physical body, it wouldn't change anything either with regards to the aging of the body being able to be stopped or not.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by Pulsar »

Coemgenu wrote
This point, however, has no relation to if the first aggregate is physical or not, nor does it have any relation to if the first base of mindfulness is the physical body or not. If the first aggregate were non-physical, it wouldn't change anything, and if the first base of mindfulness was not mindfulness of the physical body, it wouldn't change anything either with regards to the aging of the body being able to be stopped or not.
Did I refer to aging and death in my original comment? You introduced "aging and death", I was merely
responding. I do not quite understand what you are trying to get at. The subject of the thread is not "Aging and Death".
With love :candle:
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by Coëmgenu »

You said, "Origination of mental suffering" not "Origination of physical suffering." Much of the mental suffering of aging originates in the aging of the physical body. This is why it is valid as an object of mindfulness.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by Pulsar »

Coemgenu wrote
You said, "Origination of mental suffering" not "Origination of physical suffering." Much of the mental suffering of aging originates in the aging of the physical body. This is why it is valid as an object of mindfulness.
By making the physical body the first establishment of Mindfulness, how would you eliminate mental suffering due to aging? We are going off topic here, yet I like to know.
Regards :candle:
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by Coëmgenu »

Just as a ship goes on by winds impelled,
Just as a shaft goes by the bowstring's force,
So goes this body in its forward course
Full driven by the vibrant thrust of air.
As to the puppet's back the dodge-thread's tied
So to the body-doll the mind is joined
And pulled by that the body moves, stands, sits.
Where is the living being that can stand,
Or walk, by force of its own inner strength,
Without conditions that give it support?
(from the commentary to the Satipaṭṭhānasutta)

Without inquiring deeply into the body, we cannot remove the notion of "this body" (satkāyadṛṣṭi). We cannot remove self-views such as "the world and this body are one and the same." Or "the self is identical to the body." These views take the physical body as their field of error, and without addressing the physical body, it is not clear how the most subtle forms of these views can be broken. Without understanding the physical body, there would be no reason to consider unembodied experiences, such as "imagining a fire," as different from bodily experiences such as "seeing a fire." Contemplating mental images exclusively (i.e. "imagining X") is done in some traditions of mindfulness, but mindfulness is also of the physical world that you see around you.

Furthermore, in the Buddha's instruction on mindfulness in the four comportments, he says "...when a mendicant is walking they know: ‘I am walking.’ When standing they know: ‘I am standing.’ When sitting they know: ‘I am sitting.’ And when lying down they know: ‘I am lying down.’" It is not a immaterial or mentalized body that walks, sits, lies down, and stands. Yet through mindfulness of sitting, walking, lying, and standing, the path toward the pacification of mental suffering is opened as evidenced by these very instructions from Gotama Buddha.
‘The four kinds of mindfulness meditation are the path to convergence. They are in order to purify sentient beings, to get past sorrow and crying, to make an end of pain and sadness, to end the cycle of suffering, and to realize extinguishment.’
(MN 10)
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by Pulsar »

Dearest Coemgenu: To sort out the problem of the body in the canon? In the context under dicussion? it is not as simple as using poetry from the commentaries as you do, or using a fraudulent sutta MN 10 as evidence. (skull of a Piltdown man).
Within the context of Satipatthana, the body? let us resort to credible suttas. Let me walk you through SN12.37
  • "Not yours, neither anybody else's"
a reference to body.  
Find its parallel? It is not similar. Placing the phrase at the beginning of the sutta, which Samyukta agama does not; in it, it is not even found at the end.
Where did the compilers get the idea from? Read SN 35.146. It has no parallel, but it has a synthesis of right ideas received from other suttas. 
At first glance, SN 12.37 removes me from the responsibility of my body. But is it that easy?
How did the body come about?
SN 35.146 places the onus on me.
SN 12.37 says this body is not mine? but 35.146 says
"this body is old kamma"
according to BB.
Sujato translates
"this body is old action?"
 Now we are getting closer. We think: whose action?
  • But Buddha defined kamma as intention, not as action.
So the most soteriologically correct translation would be.
  • "This body is old intention"
Now the truth dawns. I am what I am due to my old intentions? if i have the wrong intentions now, my future body will be even worse off???
Did Buddha and arahants engage in massive sacrifices (renunciation) in order to acquire a trouble free body or a trouble free mind? Of course the experience is embodied. There are no minds floating around on their own.
The most critical step in the 8-fold path for the one seeking freedom from samsara is Satipatthana i.e. meditation. If you get that wrong, the resulting jhana is wrong too, there is no freedom from suffering. 
Based on the above, when we meditate in order to be free from suffering, should we target the physical body or the mental body, to begin with? 
With love and hugs :candle:
asahi
Posts: 2732
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2020 4:23 pm

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by asahi »

Kaya body (= mind ?) 😂
Vedana (feeling)
Citta (Mind)
Dhamma (Mind Objects)
No bashing No gossiping
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by Coëmgenu »

MN 10 is not a fraudulent sutta. Furthermore, the Buddha's instructions for satipaṭṭhāna direct us to contemplate the physical body in all recensions from all schools. In short, all all of EBTs are united in this.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by Pulsar »

Coemgenu wrote
MN 10 is not a fraudulent sutta.
Don't think all will agree with you here.
Furthermore, the Buddha's instructions for satipaṭṭhāna direct us to contemplate the physical body in all recensions from all schools. In short, all all of EBTs are united in this.
Powerfully said like a Lion's Roar? How do you interpret first Satipatthana in SN 47.42?
Is SN 47.42 and its perfect Samyukta agama parallel SA 609, not included in "all EBT?"
hugs :candle:
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by Coëmgenu »

Pulsar wrote: Thu Feb 10, 2022 3:44 pmIs SN 47.42 and its perfect Samyukta agama parallel SA 609, not included in "all EBT?"
This strikes me as a false equivalence. There is no reason why SN 47.42 and SA 609 would be so excluded. There are three varieties of sustenance for the nāmakāya and two varieties of sustenance for the rūpakāya. Unless otherwise specified, "kāya" refers to both as a "bodymind." It refers to the physical basis as well as the derived sensorial consciousnesses. It also refers to what is purely mental. If it only referred to the physical basis, then "kāya" would always refer to dead or inert matter. If it only referred to the mental basis, then the Buddha never spoke to embodied beings concerning their bodies.

Physical food and karma are the sustenance for the physical body. Karma, contact, and consciousness are the sustenance for the mental body. When these run out, there is no more of any of the above. The fuels is "upādisesa."

Ko ca, bhikkhave, kāyassa samudayo? Āhārasamudayā kāyassa samudayo; āhāranirodhā kāyassa atthaṅgamo.
And what is the origin of the body? The body originates from food. When food ceases, the body ends.
(SN 47.12, Ven Sujāto translation)

Earlier, I missed this:
Pulsar wrote: Thu Feb 10, 2022 3:06 pmThere are no minds floating around on their own.
There are beings who have only minds and have no physical bodies. They inhabit the formless realms.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
auto
Posts: 4582
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by auto »

Coëmgenu wrote: Thu Feb 10, 2022 4:21 pm ..
Pulsar doesn't buy the three: desire, form and formless realms
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by Coëmgenu »

I know that they entertain highly speculative theories concerning the arupas and Vibhajyadin and/or Abhidhammika conspiracies to smuggle Hinduism or Brahminism into the Buddhadhamma. I disagree with them and feel no need to avoid disagreeing, because they are largely groundless and based on misunderstandings. That isn't the issue here. The issue here is whether or not the first station of mindfulness is or includes the physical body, and whether or not it was changed by "influence of tradition???" as Pulsar put it. Certainly, incorrect notions of the formless is what causes the first station of mindfulness to become divorced from the physical body in this case. Likely, it will become the nexus of the disagreement eventually.

Either way, it is relevant to the OP. The "Vibhajyavadins" didn't smuggle formless samadhis into Buddhism. It doesn't appear as a salient detail on Ven Sujato's list cited in the OP.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by Pulsar »

auto wrote
Pulsar doesn't buy the three: desire, form and formless realms
Thanks auto, I appreciate that. Formless as in Arupa samapatthis of Jains et al were a later addition to
the canon.
Then again It depends on what one mean by "formless"???
  • Be free of form, right?
Forms that appear in the mind??? is the larger issue. Buddha's advice to Bahia, "ignore the seen, heard, sensed, cognized" (i.e. forms that appear to the mind). Bahia understood it right away, and listened. Some complain jhana is not needed, because Bahia got nibbanized without jhana. But once you get rid of form that easily, that is buddhist jhana. But maybe some in the tradition failed to notice this.

The meditator involved in right Satipatthana as in SN 47.42, can avoid forms that appear in the mind in the
very first satipatthana, by not feeding them. The first Satipatthana in SN 47.42 is discussing the 4 nutrients. "Do not feed the consciousness" is the message. (There is no teaching like this in the first Satipatthana of MN 10. It refers to bodies, body parts and corpses. How would you get rid of rupasanna by this method?)

The result of first Satipathana of Samudaya sutta is
formlessness.
we don't have to chase after Arupa samapatthis to do that, like the Jains did.
  • V. Sujato in the checklist does say that Arupa samapatthis are extraneous, not relevant to liberation.
To get back to the narrative, One who is free of forms that appear in the mind (one who is free of mental proliferation) does not enter the form and designate them.
  • There ends the consciousness
i.e. attached consciousness. why worry anymore? What remains in jhana or in an Arahant is an
  • unattached or unplanted consciousness
This is the goal of Satipatthana which culminates in jhana. An unplanted consciousness!
If one can maintain the state arrived in first satipatthana in Samudaya sutta, that itself is jhana temporary for those who can manage that. Jhana definitely is not a mode where one feels like one is in a 21st century fantabulous Jacuzzi. Pardon my phrase here.
Love and hugs my Dear auto :candle:
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by Coëmgenu »

Pulsar wrote: Thu Feb 10, 2022 8:21 pmV. Sujato in the checklist does say that Arupa samapatthis are extraneous, not relevant to liberation.
Where? Even if he did, it would not be a support for your theories concerning the formless samadhis.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Post Reply