dibba cakkhu and kammic efficacy

[Sam Vara]

Linguistically, efficacy is rooted in the idea of efficiency, which is relevant to what achieves ends with the least amount of time and energy. Dibba cakkhu is a supramundane ability that seems to confirm kammic efficacy both in worldly and spiritual matters.

I'm not sure whether the difference is relevant to your central question, but there is a difference between efficacy and efficiency, despite their origins in the same Latin word. The former means that something works, or has an effect; only the latter means the specialised sense of achieving ends with less time and energy. Something can be effective or efficacious while being extremely inefficient.

Effectiveness is about doing the right thing.
Efficiency is about doing something wihout wasting time, energy, and other resources.
It is possible to do the right thing efficiently, or inefficiently.
It is possible to do the wrong thing efficiently, or inefficiently.

Yet again, I'm failing to see how your post addresses mine. I suspect that you are merely trying to be argumentative, but I can't see what the argument is.

[Radix]

Yet again, I'm failing to see how your post addresses mine. I suspect that you are merely trying to be argumentative,

but I can't see what the argument is.

It's all in your head, in the bad faith with which you approach pretty much everything I say.
I post a nice, useful summary of the difference between "effective" and "efficienct" -- but what do you do? You see the devil in it!

[Sam Vara]

Yet again, I'm failing to see how your post addresses mine. I suspect that you are merely trying to be argumentative,

but I can't see what the argument is.

It's all in your head, in the bad faith with which you approach pretty much everything I say.
I post a nice, useful summary of the difference between "effective" and "efficienct" -- but what do you do? You see the devil in it!

Try and calm down a bit, Radix. I understand the difference between "effective" and "efficient", thanks. I've already summarised it. I can't see from your post whether you are agreeing with my summary or disagreeing with it. I don't see the devil in it (whatever that means). I just don't see the sense in it. It might help if you tried to summarise what you think I am saying in the post you responded to.

[Bundokji]

I don't quite understand what you're getting at ...
But all in all, hiri and ottappa seem central to pretty much everything.

Although I don't know how adults can learn this if they didn't learn it as children already.

The three knowledges (abhiññā) are often listed in sequence and in reference to the Buddha's enlightenment. The description of the second knowledge (dibba cakkhu) is linked to kammic efficacy, but the link to the third knowledge (āsavakkhaya) is unclear.

For example, puthujjanas are often defined as "have not seen the noble ones", but some ascetics and Brahmans are said to be able to see the noble ones or to recognize the 32 marks of a great man, but without having the third knowledge.

I do not see the relevance of hiri and ottappa to this line of inquiry.

[Radix]

Try and calm down a bit, Radix. I understand the difference between "effective" and "efficient", thanks. I've already summarised it. I can't see from your post whether you are agreeing with my summary or disagreeing with it. I don't see the devil in it (whatever that means). I just don't see the sense in it. It might help if you tried to summarise what you think I am saying in the post you responded to.

If you play dumb for long enough, it takes root.

[Radix]

I do not see the relevance of hiri and ottappa to this line of inquiry.

How can one care about kamma or kammic efficacy if one has no moral dread and shame??

[Bundokji]

How can one care about kamma or kammic efficacy if one has no moral dread and shame??

Imagine aeons of practicing moral dread and shame by the Bodhisatta culminating in long fingers in his last life. The only efficacy that i can think of is less time and energy when picking fruits, and non seems relevant to the Business of teaching/enlightening other beings.

[Sam Vara]

Try and calm down a bit, Radix. I understand the difference between "effective" and "efficient", thanks. I've already summarised it. I can't see from your post whether you are agreeing with my summary or disagreeing with it. I don't see the devil in it (whatever that means). I just don't see the sense in it. It might help if you tried to summarise what you think I am saying in the post you responded to.

If you play dumb for long enough, it takes root.

It doesn't appear that there will be a sensible response to my requests for clarification on your part. And it looks even less likely that this is going to lead to anyone gaining further insight into Theravada.

But please don't post any more pointless ad hominem comments or meta-discussion, Radix.

[Sam Vara]

Imagine aeons of practicing moral dread and shame by the Bodhisatta culminating in long fingers in his last life. The only efficacy that i can think of is less time and energy when picking fruits, and non seems relevant to the Business of teaching/enlightening other beings.

In "There are thirty-two marks of a great man", do you take DN 30 to be saying that every great man has these marks, or that any man who has these marks must be great? It occurs to me that there are several candidates who are cited as possible arahants (Ajahns Mun and Chah, for example - even a couple of people who post here!) and yet none of them have these characteristics. None of them even come close.

If we take the whole thing as being literally true, could it be that those marks are the unintended consequences (and useless consequences, apart from the ease of identification) of just some beings who have undergone a particular path to enlightenment?

Personally, the problem you raise convinces me that they are not to be taken literally - more as poetic exaggerations of physical characteristics which were held to be desirable and high-status at the time.

[pudai]

Such a thing is an omnipresence that when not obscured and well developed that does not get entangled... The coming and going of beings is the purified view. Saying attributes etc. is clinging; In saying or stating those attributes etc. One thus inflamed with tathata: Then inflames others with tathata while what was seen may not be a lie? It still falls under false speech as gossip.

Think of the imagery of compassion having many eyes... it is representative of a being that has gone many rounds of correct seeing since the "third eye" is where the real seat of jhana exists even though it is in the spheres of perception and apperception and all pervasive space; meaning it is a shared attribute thinking it is one's own "eye"? Is conceit or anatman when it is anata but as said sharing what was seen etc inflames... in so using the tathata of it; Leaving no trace is foremost in practice of the attainment.

Similar could be said of the other senses their objects and the corresponding spheres... equanimity is an attribute of perfection that should be carried through all of the jhanas and all of the realms or spheres of being.

The difference between slow path and quick path is the ability to remain round after round as the eye without allowing the gunas to inflame.

Seeing that such a thing is nearly impossible to keep clean I quit using it and the kamma of using it and those attached knowingly or not(heedless) only brought more problems being attached(known through hearing) the kamma is someone using it in this lokka the same as that fool that used it there. The near enemy far enemy dichotomy and one of the reasons Gautama said it was a quicker path in avoiding the use of; Supranormal powers... like some trade barter or marriage is trying to be performed between some ignorant that doesn't know samadhi without talking and another ignorant that does the same.

Not enough dowry and Namaste are known commons to fend off such advances when it is just spiritual practice colliding with all of those beings; that are not even looking for moksha just a better situation by grasping. As a hermit that gets really annoying being a renunciate having not invited the myriad of beings attached to acquisitions.... One robe one bowl is a good thing to remind a bhikkhu thats all there is and thats all he is when visiting so he doesn't get under some silly idea of abbot/apprentice.(good friend)

[Bundokji]

In "There are thirty-two marks of a great man", do you take DN 30 to be saying that every great man has these marks, or that any man who has these marks must be great? It occurs to me that there are several candidates who are cited as possible arahants (Ajahns Mun and Chah, for example - even a couple of people who post here!) and yet none of them have these characteristics. None of them even come close.

If we take the whole thing as being literally true, could it be that those marks are the unintended consequences (and useless consequences, apart from the ease of identification) of just some beings who have undergone a particular path to enlightenment?

Personally, the problem you raise convinces me that they are not to be taken literally - more as poetic exaggerations of physical characteristics which were held to be desirable and high-status at the time.

I think the importance of the 32 marks is that they demonstrate that we cannot talk about "efficacy" meaningfully without manifestations in space and time.

On another thread, a member mentioned that in the Vinaya, the Buddha makes it a requirement that samanas from outside dhammas should undergo four months probation before being allowed bhikkhu ordination. But later he grants several exemptions. One of these is to the Jaṭilas and is granted precisely on the grounds that the Jaṭila dhamma affirms kammic efficacy.

viewtopic.php?t=44829&start=30

That got me thinking: what is so important about kammic efficacy, then linking it to dibba cakkhu and the 32 marks. As a general rule, it is preferable to know what we are putting our faith in, or if something is so efficient, why do we want to transcend it?

It goes without saying that the vast majority of humans believe that their intentions matter to a certain extent, but they are uncertain that their good deeds will be rewarded and evil deeds will be punished without remembering past lives, so they do not rule out that they can get away with bad things, and their good deeds might go unrewarded. This is where the first two knowledges comes into play: remembering past lives, and knowing that people are reborn according to their deeds. It is not clear how does that lead to the third knowledge, nor how impermanence comes into play to compromise that efficacy. If the efficacy can be compromised in any way that allows an escape, then its not a real efficacy, and believing in it should not be a prerequisite.

[Jack19990101]

Not entirely confident I got your point correctly, but I think -
it is about time vs vipaka.

This is my take on it -
Time is part of Kamma vipaka, not outside. With that, all vipaka is immediate, with a dimension of time as an element.

Intention is like a strike to hot charcoal - the spark flies off right away, we just don't know exact time it will land.

That is efficacy of it.

As to why to transcend kamma - is it not a question to oneself? Others' reason won't cut it for u, no?

I am still not able to wrap my mind around the mentioning of 32 marks in context of this tho...

[Bundokji]

As to why to transcend kamma - is it not a question to oneself? Others' reason won't cut it for u, no?

Think in terns of the interdependence between determinism and free will. Full efficacy would present the deterministic view of efficacy: attempting to break away would be an act of futility, a waste of time and energy.

I am still not able to wrap my mind around the mentioning of 32 marks in context of this tho...

They are the culmination of the Bodhisatta kamma-vipaka equation, of which a choice has to be made between a becoming a wheel turning monarch or a Buddha. They appear useless to the purposes of both and they bring the whole issue of kammic efficacy into question.

[Jack19990101]

The six faculties at this moment is the ripe vipaka in full. That is the determined.
Entangled with the six faculties or not, is the free will.

I think the 2nd line also explains my take on Buddha vs Monarchy.

[pudai]

As to why to transcend kamma - is it not a question to oneself? Others' reason won't cut it for u, no?

Think in terns of the interdependence between determinism and free will. Full efficacy would present the deterministic view of efficacy: attempting to break away would be an act of futility, a waste of time and energy.

I am still not able to wrap my mind around the mentioning of 32 marks in context of this tho...

They are the culmination of the Bodhisatta kamma-vipaka equation, of which a choice has to be made between a becoming a wheel turning monarch or a Buddha. They appear useless to the purposes of both and they bring the whole issue of kammic efficacy into question.

Trying to establish the thirty two marks and or a combination of the eighty is a Tibetan Vajrayana path... what gets termed simply as completion or union with the deity as the Gautama Buddha body has been deified. Jains shun time as non existent and have all the precepts under one title Ahimsa as in what harm could one do in following all the precepts... and of course the entire culmination of the eightfold being accomplished by living as an incarnation(Kartika) of Gautama with two attendants guiding the entire way will culminate in a body no different than mentioned.

No different than someone that says... Hey I wanna get crucified would bear the whip, nail, thorn and spear marks of Christ you can go get that in Spain and the Philippines. Those marks naturally arise of course no different than being reborn an elephant looks like an elephant and walking the path of yoga produce marks as being a criminal in Rome did... Through the not self principle of neither existing or non-existing etc and with faith in the buddha and buddha dhamma it is possible but like those picked to do such a thing find out you have to actually do it yourself to attain actual Buddhahood not just be included in the body along for the ride at his parinibbana its everbody out like it or not... Thr same with the other "saints" and if being able to live their life isnt metta especially if you manage to make a pure(r) land out of it? I don't know what is... What else is the nirodha attainment good for if not that as it is the doorway to wisdom.

Sadhu! Sadhu!

.