Atthakavagga, Formless, Consciousness and Namarupa

[Pulsar]

Ceisiwr the seeker in his grand gesture to bring down the Buddha to his level
writes Buddha lived in

Iron Age India.

His Dhamma is timeless, which C cannot fathom. A timeless thing is neither Iron Age dependent, nor space age dependent.
Yet one can say In the Space Age lives "Space Shots", like the seeker.
Seek well Dear Seeker!

• but not in the jungle of pre-buddhist ideas.

Buddha rescued us from the agony of Veda/Upanisad/Ajivaka/Jain ideas. Your thinking reminds me of a foot note in Potthapada sutta, it goes something like
"No matter how much one tries to bathe and shampoo a pig, the pig always returns to the pigsty".

An apt saying, whether Buddha said it or commentary claimed so.
Seek well my Dear friend!

[Pulsar]

From Potthapada footnotes, by Bhikku Bodhi, correcting my recollection of such, in the
previous comment. RD quotes DA's comment that a

village pig, even if bathed in perfumed water,
garlanded and laid on the best bed,
will still return to the dunghill, in the same way Potthapada still returns to the
idea of a "self"

The foot note in Digha Nikaya struck me,
in the same way Ceisiwr returns to his ideas of the Buddha. no matter how others try to
convince him of Salayatana.
With love

[auto]

Auto wrote

I wonder what those who don't understand the meaning of commentary think of it?

Why would people who understand

• dependent origination according to Buddha, and know how to meditate according to SN 47.42 bother with commentary?

Would it not be a waste of time? Who would move back to second grade (commentary) after graduating from the 12th grade (Well versed in Dependent Origination of suffering and suttas of the SN/SA, and know how to meditate according SN 47.42)?

Personally i don't need neither sutta nor commentaries. Third party people who has made progress telling instructions how to do it, is(was) enough for me. Could say sutta and abhidhamma readings is for me post breakthrough activity. And without forum, i wouldn't even do that much.
Sutta and abhidhamma both too complicated. Not sure to whom they are meant, if starting out.

[Pondera]

Atthakavagga clarifies the original meaning of the word formless as the founder intended. A sutta which was studied by honest monks during Buddha's lifetime.

• What did Buddha mean by formless?

If we misinterpret the original meaning of what is in the canon (I can point out several instances of such) do these suttas still qualify?

• Niddesa misinterpreted "without form" in Sn 4.11 with endless negative repercussions.

Also the Pali canon states:

• There is no consciousness without namarupa, There is no namarupa without consciousness and consciousness is always consciousness of the 6 sense bases.

How do the good people on the forum understand this?
Does the Arahant have the consciousness of the 6 sense bases? If so, then the Arahant would be still subject to craving. This is an oxymoron.
In other words, does the awareness of the Arahant undergo Salayatana?
Does the Arahant's consciousness which is unlike the consciousness of the ordinary (puthujjana) still give rise to sorrow/discontent/death?
Does the deathless Arahant die? If so, what is the point of the teaching?
With love

Isn’t the Arahant said to have Nibbana with *residue*? He achieves Paranibbana after “physical” death?

Is he *attached* to namarupa? That is the question. To what *extent* has he *elevated* himself above sense consciousness and to what extent, therefore, is he free of namarupa; not only in the *now*; but also the *hereafter*.

The Buddha’s message is interesting. If we follow his path we escape rebirth. But if we follow his path we also enjoy the fruits of the holy life in the here and now. The jhanas.

Don’t ask *me* what it means to not be reborn. I do not know.

And certainly don’t ask an *arahant* whether he exists, doesn’t, both does and doesn’t, neither does nor doesn’t (exist after death).

If I were to speculate, the definite “answer” could have something to do with the nature of Nirodha Samapatti - for that is attainable in this lifetime. And that may indicate the state to which an Arahant goes when life here is spent.

[Pondera]

Ceisiwr the seeker in his grand gesture to bring down the Buddha to his level
writes Buddha lived in

Iron Age India.

His Dhamma is timeless, which C cannot fathom. A timeless thing is neither Iron Age dependent, nor space age dependent.
Yet one can say In the Space Age lives "Space Shots", like the seeker.
Seek well Dear Seeker!

• but not in the jungle of pre-buddhist ideas.

Buddha rescued us from the agony of Veda/Upanisad/Ajivaka/Jain ideas. Your thinking reminds me of a foot note in Potthapada sutta, it goes something like
"No matter how much one tries to bathe and shampoo a pig, the pig always returns to the pigsty".

An apt saying, whether Buddha said it or commentary claimed so.
Seek well my Dear friend!

The Buddha declared that his Dhamma would die (in the same sense that all things are impermanent). After allowing women into the fold, that happened four hundred years earlier than it would have otherwise.

So the dhamma, the raft, the *other shore* is a matter of interpretation these days. Unfortunately, though the Pratyekabuddhas may exist, they do not preach the dhamma.

[Ceisiwr]

Ceisiwr the seeker in his grand gesture to bring down the Buddha to his level
writes Buddha lived in

Iron Age India.

His Dhamma is timeless, which C cannot fathom. A timeless thing is neither Iron Age dependent, nor space age dependent.
Yet one can say In the Space Age lives "Space Shots", like the seeker.
Seek well Dear Seeker!

• but not in the jungle of pre-buddhist ideas.

Buddha rescued us from the agony of Veda/Upanisad/Ajivaka/Jain ideas. Your thinking reminds me of a foot note in Potthapada sutta, it goes something like
"No matter how much one tries to bathe and shampoo a pig, the pig always returns to the pigsty".

An apt saying, whether Buddha said it or commentary claimed so.
Seek well my Dear friend!

The person who called himself a Buddha lived in Iron Age India. If he didn’t eat, breathe and walk around teaching people we wouldn’t even be having this conversation. To say he did all that without sense experience is absurd. There is also no need to compare me to a pig because you don’t like what I’m saying.

[Pulsar]

Ceisiwr writes

There is also no need to compare me to a pig because you don’t like what I’m saying.

I had corrected the footnote from Potthapada sutta as follows in a later comment

a village pig, even if bathed in perfumed water,
garlanded and laid on the best bed,
will still return to the dunghill, in the same way Potthapada still returns to the
idea of a "self"
The foot note in Digha Nikaya struck me,
in the same way Ceisiwr returns to his ideas of the Buddha. no matter how others try to
convince him of Salayatana.

The footnote appears to say Buddha has taught Potthapada the drawbacks of self. But Potthapada kept returning to the idea of a self.
It is not that I like or dislike what you are saying. I was merely pointing out the similarity of the two situations.
You keep returning to the idea that Buddha's experience of the sensory world is similar to the sensory experience of a puthujjana, without admitting that you are incapable of understanding the teaching of Salayatana Samyutta.
Be well!

[Ceisiwr]

It is not that I like or dislike what you are saying. I was merely pointing out the similarity of the two situations.
You keep returning to the idea that Buddha's experience of the sensory world is similar to the sensory experience of a puthujjana, without admitting that you are incapable of understanding the teaching of Salayatana Samyutta.
Be well!

Nowhere have I posited a Dravyasat self, so I’m not doing what Poṭṭhapāda kept doing. I’ve also not claimed that the Buddha’s experience of the 6 senses is the same as the worldly persons. One is without ignorance etc, the other isn’t.

[Pulsar]

Ceisiwr wrote

I’ve also not claimed that the Buddha’s experience of the 6 senses is the same as the worldly persons. One is without ignorance etc, the other isn’t.

Thanks, now we are getting somewhere, can you explain the difference?
Comprehension of that difference is founded on a right comprehension of Paticca samuppada.
Perhaps you do understand Paticca samuppada as Buddha taught it, not as later schools
taught it?
Be well!

[Ceisiwr]

Ceisiwr wrote

I’ve also not claimed that the Buddha’s experience of the 6 senses is the same as the worldly persons. One is without ignorance etc, the other isn’t.

Thanks, now we are getting somewhere, can you explain the difference?
Comprehension of that difference is founded on a right comprehension of Paticca samuppada.
Perhaps you do understand Paticca samuppada as Buddha taught it, not as later schools
taught it?
Be well!

One is with ignorance etc, the other isn’t.

[auto]

How grasping aggregates come,

But when the eye is intact internally and exterior sights come into range and there is corresponding engagement, there is the manifestation of the corresponding type of consciousness.
Yato ca kho, āvuso, ajjhattikañceva cakkhuṁ aparibhinnaṁ hoti, bāhirā ca rūpā āpāthaṁ āgacchanti, tajjo ca samannāhāro hoti. Evaṁ tajjassa viññāṇabhāgassa pātubhāvo hoti.


The form produced in this way is included in the grasping aggregate of form. The feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness produced in this way are each included in the corresponding grasping aggregate.

OP's favorite sutta,

And what is the origin of the body?
Ko ca, bhikkhave, kāyassa samudayo?
The body originates from food.
Āhārasamudayā kāyassa samudayo;

mn28 quote contains the term: samannāhāra. That's the possible and obvious link between sn47.42 and mn28.
Another link is that the grasping aggregates are called sakkāya,

The Buddha said that these five grasping aggregates are identity.”
Ime kho, āvuso, pañcupādānakkhandhā sakkāyo vutto bhagavatā”ti.

Grasping aggregates could refer to the literal physical, corporeal body.

Buddhist Dictionary by NYANATILOKA MAHATHERA

sakkāya：'existing group'．'this word is usually translated by 'personality'，but according to the commentaries it corresponds to sat-kāya，'existing group'，hence not to Sanskrit sva-kāya，'own group' or 'own body'．In the Suttas （e．g．M．44） it is said to be a name for the 5 groups of existence （khandha）：Sakkāya，o Brother Visākha，is said by the Blessed One to be a name for the 5 'groups as objects of clinging' （upādāna-kkhandha），to wit：corporeality，feeling，perception，mental formations，and consciousness．＂ - See foll．
.
..
Concise Pali-English Dictionary by A.P. Buddhadatta Mahathera

sakkāya：[m．] the existing body．

Logically, when you come aware, you come aware of this corporeal body and reality what is the real world. Its the starting point(maybe) for making real progress in deforming the body when under the sunlight enough time, also real progress in meditation. (sry about the repetition of real)