Author Topic: Dependent Origination  (Read 52318 times)

Offline Dairy Lama

  • Member
  • Posts: 5324
  • Cool baby yeah!
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #90 on: August 16, 2010, 06:40:09 am »
And , of course, the thing to remember is that the four noble truths were expounded to, and apply to, UNENLIGHTENED BEINGS, samsaric beings for whom petty nonsense like birth, old age, sickness and death are sources of suffering (because of their ignorance).  If one has realised the emptiness of self and all phenomena then who gets sick?  Who ages?  Who dies?  Who suffers?
 :namaste:

So dukkha is just a mental phenomenon arising from ignorance?

Spiny 
"My religion is very simple - my religion is ice-cream"

Offline Dairy Lama

  • Member
  • Posts: 5324
  • Cool baby yeah!
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #91 on: August 16, 2010, 06:42:18 am »
Dear Spiny, don't pick and choose bits out of what I say in order to compound your inability to comprehend. 

I'm just asking a straightforward question.  My interest here is in understanding dukkha, not in speculating about the various interpretations of DO.

Spiny
"My religion is very simple - my religion is ice-cream"

Offline Ron-the-Elder

  • Member
  • Posts: 4551
  • May all beings live rightly and harmoniously.
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #92 on: August 16, 2010, 07:11:51 am »
According to the following definition of dukkha, aging disease, death, and rebirth are not dukkha.  Pain, suffering, stress, and dissatisfaction are.

I now see the problem you are having with this.  My understanding was flawed as well since I believed pain not to be included in the definition.  So, it appears that rebirth, aging, disease,death, and rebirth are but functions of the samsaric realm in which we exist at the time of experiencing dukkha.  Pain is impermanent and dependently arisen as is suffering and consequences of kamma.  However, when nibanna is attained, all of this goes away with some variations, because there are apparently two different levels of nibbana.  (See nibbana thread.)



Definition of Dukkha from http://what-buddha-said.net/library/Buddhist.Dictionary/dic3_d.htm

Quote
Dukkha: 1 'pain', painful feeling, which may be bodily and mental see: vedanā

2 'Suffering', 'ill'. As the first of the Four Noble Truths see: sacca and the second of the three characteristics of existence see: ti-lakkhana the term dukkha is not limited to painful experience as under 1, but refers to the unsatisfactory nature and the general insecurity of all conditioned phenomena which, on account of their impermanence, are all liable to suffering, and this includes also pleasurable experience. Hence 'unsatisfactoriness' or 'liability to suffering' would be more adequate renderings, if not for stylistic reasons. Hence the first truth does not deny the existence of pleasurable experience, as is sometimes wrongly assumed. This is illustrated by the following texts:

;Seeking satisfaction in the world, Bhikkhus, I had pursued my way. That satisfaction in the world I found. In so far as satisfaction existed in the world, I have well perceived it by understanding. Seeking for misery in the world, Bhikkhus, I had pursued my way. That misery in the world I found. In so far as misery existed in the world, I have well perceived it by understanding. Seeking for the escape from the world, Bhikkhus, I had pursued my way. That escape from the world I found. In so far as an escape from the world existed, I have well perceived it by understanding; A. 111, 101.

;If there were no satisfaction to be found in the world, beings would not be attached to the world.  If there were no misery to be found in the world, beings would not be repelled by the world.  If there were no escape from the world, beings could not escape therefrom; A. 111, 102.

See dukkhatā For texts on the Truth of Suffering, see W. of B. and 'path'.

See The Three Basic Facts of Existence, II. Suffering WHEEL 191/193
« Last Edit: August 16, 2010, 07:18:49 am by Bodhisatta2010 »
What Makes an Elder? :
A head of gray hairs doesn't mean one's an elder. Advanced in years, one's called an old fool.
But one in whom there is truth, restraint, rectitude, gentleness,self-control, he's called an elder, his impurities disgorged, enlightened.
-Dhammpada, 19, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu.

Offline Dairy Lama

  • Member
  • Posts: 5324
  • Cool baby yeah!
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #93 on: August 16, 2010, 07:26:33 am »
According to the following definition of dukkha, aging disease, death, and rebirth are not dukkha.  Pain, suffering, stress, and dissatisfaction are.


Interesting, Ron.  I've started a new thread to look at this.

Spiny
"My religion is very simple - my religion is ice-cream"

Offline gregkavarnos

  • Member
  • Posts: 645
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #94 on: August 16, 2010, 07:45:47 am »
So dukkha is just a mental phenomenon arising from ignorance?
Dear Spiny, I think that if you actually take the time to read what I quoted it will (and has) answered your question (repeatedly).
 :namaste:
"A genius is a person who, on a beach full of nudists, can remember peoples faces!"  Arka

Offline Dairy Lama

  • Member
  • Posts: 5324
  • Cool baby yeah!
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #95 on: August 17, 2010, 04:03:44 am »
So dukkha is just a mental phenomenon arising from ignorance?
Dear Spiny, I think that if you actually take the time to read what I quoted it will (and has) answered your question (repeatedly).
 :namaste:

Yes, I think you've answered that question.

Spiny
"My religion is very simple - my religion is ice-cream"

Offline Disney Land

  • Member
  • Posts: 53
  • The Emptiness Bliss
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #96 on: February 27, 2011, 11:56:16 pm »
 :r4wheel:
Quote
When I first came to study I saw the mountains as mountains, and the sea as sea.
After many years I saw no mountains and I saw no sea, all was emptiness.
But finally, having understood, I again saw the mountains, but only as mountains;
and I saw the sea again, but only as the sea.
 Blush

 :namaste:
Quote
I first came to study I saw the mountains as mountains, and the sea as sea.
Forms

Quote
After many years I saw no mountains and I saw no sea, all was emptiness.
Formless

Quote
But finally, having understood, I again saw the mountains, but only as mountains;
and I saw the sea again, but only as the sea.

Emptiness and forms are equal
;D
n Elder Master once said:
Those who skillfully discourse on Mind and Self-Nature surely can never reject Cause and Effect; those who believe deeply in Cause and Effect naturally understand the Mind and Self-Nature in depth. This is a natural development.
If it were not for a period of penetrating cold, the plum blossom could never develop its exquisite perfume!

Offline Don Athukorala

  • Member
  • Posts: 26
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #97 on: August 15, 2011, 03:45:18 pm »
I fully agree with
(1) Dependent Origination - The Law of Conditionality - P.A.Payutto
(2) Dependent Origination  by Christina Feldman
(3) Dependent Origination by Bhikkhu Buddhadasa

Buddha's teaching of Paticcasamuppada has to be understood as "birth and death of the moment; the arising and decay of one mind moment. It is a Biological process

I have authored a book based on this aspect of Buddha's teaching titled "Buddha's Principle of Relativity" Please Google search using this heading

Offline Dairy Lama

  • Member
  • Posts: 5324
  • Cool baby yeah!
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #98 on: August 16, 2011, 03:21:40 am »
I fully agree with
(1) Dependent Origination - The Law of Conditionality - P.A.Payutto
(2) Dependent Origination  by Christina Feldman
(3) Dependent Origination by Bhikkhu Buddhadasa

Buddha's teaching of Paticcasamuppada has to be understood as "birth and death of the moment; the arising and decay of one mind moment. It is a Biological process

I'd say it's the traditional view of DO which is describing a biological process, whereas the alternative view you've identified is describing a psychological process.  Unfortunately the way the 12 links are described in the suttas don't really support the alternative view, and it's far from clear what is being "reborn" with the moment-to-moment rebirth model.

Spiny
"My religion is very simple - my religion is ice-cream"

Offline Don Athukorala

  • Member
  • Posts: 26
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #99 on: August 28, 2011, 02:23:58 pm »

Ven Buddhaghosa’s interpretation of DO
The traditional view of DO is an interpretation in Visuddhimagga, authored by Ven Buddhaghosa (VB) about 1500 years ago. He categorically stated that he did not understand DO in the way Buddha explained it to the ancients.
Quote from Visuddhimagga (page 540)
“The truth, a being, rebirth - linking and ‘structure of conditions’ (DO) are four things very hard to see and likewise difficult to teach” unquote
He, therefore, came up with his own opinion and actually said ‘one’s own opinion is the weakest authority of all and should only be accepted if it accords with other teachings of the Buddha.

Note
Visuddhimagga was translated into English in 1956 by British born monk Bhikkhu Nanamoli. His book Path to Purification is available for free download from the internet. Please see pages – xxxvi, 540 and 602 on VB’s understanding of DO.

I have made a study of DO to explain it as a biological process using present day knowledge of Biology, Physiology. ‘Birth and death’ are the arising and passing away of one mind moment. It takes place in milliseconds. Physiologically it is an action potential. Buddha was in fact talking about  brain waves.

My book explains this. It is titled ‘Buddha’s Principle of Relativity’. Please read it in the internet.



Offline Dairy Lama

  • Member
  • Posts: 5324
  • Cool baby yeah!
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #100 on: August 30, 2011, 02:20:27 am »
I have made a study of DO to explain it as a biological process using present day knowledge of Biology, Physiology. ‘Birth and death’ are the arising and passing away of one mind moment. It takes place in milliseconds. Physiologically it is an action potential. Buddha was in fact talking about  brain waves.

Unfortunately this model of DO isn't supported by the way the nidanas are defined and described in the suttas, see for example MN9.

Spiny
"My religion is very simple - my religion is ice-cream"

Offline Don Athukorala

  • Member
  • Posts: 26
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #101 on: September 01, 2011, 03:42:05 pm »
The question as to whether DO spans a lifetime or mind moments is not defined in DN9 by Ven Sariputta.
During Buddha’s time the nidanas were ‘sutras’ to explain to disciples in a language they would understand. DO is Abhidhamma – a theory, a science and not a sutra. It was therefore extremely difficult for ordinary disciples to understand.

In the traditional view, DO is merely a statement; birth follows death, followed by birth and death and so on. This is reincarnation. Rebirth or reincarnation was well known to the ancients as a central dogma in Hindu philosophy. This is not so important an announcement for Buddha to make soon after Enlightenment, in fact, seven days after. Buddha explained to Ven Ananda that DO is not an easy theory to understand where sentient beings get muddled like a ball of thread.

There is no mention of ‘relinking consciousness’ in DO. Sankhara is followed by vinnana, not patisandi vinnana. If so, relinking is a concept in the chain that has to be clearly explained. It is not a Buddha word.  Does this infer a self? Buddha was quite confident when he said anatta – no self. 


DO and mind moments
Buddha said DO is akaliko sanditthiko
In Pali, kaliko means ‘time’ and akaliko is the opposite; i.e. no time or instantaneous and sanditthiko means immediately thereafter. DO occurs instantaneously and repeats itself as mind moments. Neuro scientists call them Action Potentials with a rising phase followed by a falling phase occurring in milliseconds. The reference is to brain waves.


Offline Dairy Lama

  • Member
  • Posts: 5324
  • Cool baby yeah!
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #102 on: September 02, 2011, 02:08:41 am »
The question as to whether DO spans a lifetime or mind moments is not defined in DN9 by Ven Sariputta.

I disagree, because MN9 doesn't describe mind moments.  For example birth, ageing and death are clearly described in ( literal ) physical terms, not psychologically.  Similarly descriptions of the other nidanas don't support a psychological model, so I remain unconcinced.

Spiny
"My religion is very simple - my religion is ice-cream"

Offline Don Athukorala

  • Member
  • Posts: 26
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #103 on: September 03, 2011, 03:21:51 pm »
I would rather go by what Buddha said in the Abhidhamma in preference to what His disciples described from the Sutras. They found it difficult to describe a biological process to the mostly illiterate disciples of their time.

Further, DO has to be understood along with other Pali words like akaliko, sanditthiko I mentioned earlier. Words like anuloma and patiloma. Anuloma is the forward process of DO whilst patiloma is the reverse process. How will one interpret patiloma in the traditional interpretation? Once a foetus is formed it becomes a baby ending in birth. Can anyone reverse this process?

Offline Dairy Lama

  • Member
  • Posts: 5324
  • Cool baby yeah!
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #104 on: September 05, 2011, 08:19:16 am »
I would rather go by what Buddha said in the Abhidhamma in preference to what His disciples described from the Sutras. Further, DO has to be understood along with other Pali words like akaliko, sanditthiko I mentioned earlier. Words like anuloma and patiloma. Anuloma is the forward process of DO whilst patiloma is the reverse process. How will one interpret patiloma in the traditional interpretation? Once a foetus is formed it becomes a baby ending in birth. Can anyone reverse this process?

The Abhidhamma is a way of classifying what was described in the suttas and is therefore more like a commentary.  I think it's unwise to reify it or treat it as some kind of "authority" which is superior to the Pali Cannon as a whole.

DO in reverse order is simply describing the cessation of a number of dependently related processes.

What puzzles me is the need to rewrite sutta descriptions of the nidanas in order to try and come up with a psychological version of DO - why bother?  Some of the nidanas do clearly describe the psychological process, there is plenty to work with there.

Spiny
"My religion is very simple - my religion is ice-cream"

 


SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal