Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Mettasutta.

Expand Messages
  • traveller
    Dear Nina & All, So in the same sutta, buuta appeared in 3 places: 1. ye keci paa.nabhuutatthi, ... 2. bhuutaa va sambhavesii va, ... 3. evampi sabbabhuutesu,
    Message 1 of 18 , Aug 25, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Nina & All,
      So in the same sutta, buuta appeared in 3 places:
      1. ye keci paa.nabhuutatthi, ...
      2. bhuutaa va sambhavesii va, ...
      3. evampi sabbabhuutesu, ...

      Only in case 2, buutaa refers to arahants?

      If so, then sambhavessii refers to all except arahants, then why
      bother to differentiate the before and after of those egg-born or
      womb-born beings?

      Seems the Qs would go on endlessly. From all the discussions, it's
      obvious that there has been different interpretations since long.
      My original enquiry was to know what the interpretation of
      sambhavesii would be to go with the view of immediate-rebirth.
      Thank you all.
      virtually with real metta,
      Traveller

      --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Piya Tan <libris@...> wrote:
      >
      > Nina,
      >
      > That "bhuuta" refers to arhats is most interesting: do you
      references for this?
      >
      > Piya
      >
      > --- Yufen Shih <yufen.shih@...> wrote:
      >
      > > Dear Nina,
      > > Thanks again but seems more Qs induced.
      > >
      > > 1. If only arahats are bhuuta, then what's the explanation for
      > > "evampi
      > > sabbabhuutesu" in the same sutta?
      > >
      > > 2. Not sure if i understand you correctly. Do you mean the first
      > > moment of
      > > a life is when a baby was born to the world? Then the 10month in
      > > womb is
      > > without consciousness? This will be easily refuted by the
      > > evidences found
      > > today.
      > >
      > > virtually with real metta,
      > > Traveller
      > > --------------------------------------
      > > Dear Traveller,
      > > The arahats are called bhuuta, not the sekhas and ordinary men.
      It
      > > is
      > > said:<That are bhuuta): that have been born, generated; they are
      > > reckoned thus 'They are (have been), they will not be again,
      which
      > > is
      > > a designation for those with tainsts exhausted, [namely,
      Arahants].
      > > >
      > > As to the unborn human babies also are called those that yet seek
      > > to
      > > be, yes, in this context. They are still in the womb.
      > > Actually, when we consider the rebirth-consciousness, this is the
      > > first moment of a life.
      > > Nina.
      > > Op 22-aug-2006, om 12:26 heeft traveller het volgende geschreven:
      > >
      > > > Regarding to Q1, the explanation in the Commentary brings some
      > > more
      > > > questions.
      > > > Aren't those bhuuta? The Initiates and ordinary men, etc.
      > > > Or the unborn human babies also are called those that yet seek
      to
      > > be?
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
      > > Paa.li-Parisaa - The Pali Collective
      > > [Homepage] http://www.tipitaka.net
      > > [Files] http://www.geocities.com/paligroup/
      > > [Send Message] pali@yahoogroups.com
      > > Yahoo! Groups members can set their delivery options to daily
      digest
      > > or web only.
      > > Yahoo! Groups Links
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      > Piya Tan
      > Email: dharmafarer@...
      >
    • Nina van Gorkom
      Dear Traveller, As is often the case, different aspects are shown to give a complete meaning. Thus, a certain word has different meanings in different
      Message 2 of 18 , Aug 26, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Traveller,
        As is often the case, different aspects are shown to give a complete
        meaning.
        Thus, a certain word has different meanings in different contexts.

        Nina.
        Op 26-aug-2006, om 7:10 heeft traveller het volgende geschreven:

        > So in the same sutta, buuta appeared in 3 places:
        > 1. ye keci paa.nabhuutatthi, ...
        > 2. bhuutaa va sambhavesii va, ...
        > 3. evampi sabbabhuutesu, ...
        >
        > Only in case 2, buutaa refers to arahants?
        >
        > If so, then sambhavessii refers to all except arahants, then why
        > bother to differentiate the before and after of those egg-born or
        > womb-born beings?



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Nina van Gorkom
        Dear Piya, I appreciate your question. I quoted from the Co. to the Metta sutta, but the same is also used in the Udana Co. re Bahiyasutta. I quote now from
        Message 3 of 18 , Aug 27, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Dear Piya,
          I appreciate your question.
          I quoted from the Co. to the Metta sutta, but the same is also used
          in the Udana Co. re Bahiyasutta.

          I quote now from Robert's forum who incorporated a letter from Sarah
          (moderator of dhammastudygroup):

          <Peter Masefield�s translation of the Udana (Ud) and Udana commentary
          (Ud-a)
          http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/khudd...ana/ud1-10.html
          Ud-a continues:

          QUOTE
          �It is, moreover, wrong on the part of those who seek reference to an
          intermediate becoming (antaraabhava.m) by seizing upon the phrase
          ubhayamantarena [in both]. For the existence of an intermediate
          becoming is altogether rejected in the Abhidhamma. ....Furthermore,
          those who still say that there is an intermediate becoming by seizing
          unmethodically upon the meaning of such sutta-passages as �An
          antaraaparinibbaayin� (eg Aiv70ff) and �Those who are become or those
          seeking becoming�(Khp8) are to be rebuffed with �there is no (such
          thing)�, since the meaning of the former sutta passage is that he is
          an antaraaparinibbaayin since he attains parinibbaana
          (parinibbaayati) by way of remainderles defilement-parinibbana
          through attaining the topmost path midway (antaraa)[in lifespan]....,
          whilst the meaning of the latter (sutta-passage) is that those who,
          in the former word, are spoken of as �those who are
          become� (bhuutaa), are those in whom the asavas have been destroyed,
          being those who are merely become, (but) who will not become (again,
          (whereas the latter,) being the antithesis thereof, (and spoken of
          as) �those seeking becoming� (sambhavesino) since it is becoming
          (sambhava.m) that they seek (esenti), are sekhas and puthujjanas on
          account of the fetters giving rise to becoming not having been
          abandoned....�
          �For when there is a straightforward meaning that follows the
          (canonical) Pali, what business is there in postulating an
          intermediate becoming of unspecified capacity?�>
          End quote.
          ---------
          So, the point is, that we at this moment cannot give up clinging to
          life, we still want to be reborn. The arahat is not so, he has become
          but is not seeking to be born again. Thus in the quoted passage the
          difference between the non-arahat and arahat is shown.
          Just in this context the term bhuuta is used in this way.
          Nina.

          Op 24-aug-2006, om 11:53 heeft Piya Tan het volgende geschreven:

          > That "bhuuta" refers to arhats is most interesting: do you
          > references for this?



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Piya Tan
          Thanks very much, Nina. I value the opinions of both sides: whether those who are faith- and text-based, and those who rely on meditation and personal
          Message 4 of 18 , Aug 27, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            Thanks very much, Nina. I value the opinions of both sides: whether those who are faith- and text-based, and those who rely on meditation and personal experience, not that they are exclusive.

            I have also just signed up for the Abhidhamma Vipassana Forum to get a balanced learning process. We have so much to learn from both the Vipassana tradition and the Forest tradition.

            In todays Straits Times, a member of a local Presbyterian church is up in arms against his church because he thinks that the King James Bible is not a good translation. Things went to a ahed that he was suspended from attending church, and not he is suing the church elders for defamation, etc.

            I mention his because we should be reminded that open forum and discussion is a great learning process, and we have to continuosly appreciate the Buddha's great wisdom and compassion is giving us teachings without unresolvable conflicts. Above all we are allowed to think for ourselves.

            Sukhi

            Piya Tan


            --- Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...> wrote:

            > Dear Piya,
            > I appreciate your question.
            > I quoted from the Co. to the Metta sutta, but the same is also used
            >
            > in the Udana Co. re Bahiyasutta.
            >
            > I quote now from Robert's forum who incorporated a letter from Sarah
            >
            > (moderator of dhammastudygroup):
            >
            > <Peter Masefield’s translation of the Udana (Ud) and Udana
            > commentary
            > (Ud-a)
            > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/khudd...ana/ud1-10.html
            > Ud-a continues:
            >
            > QUOTE
            > “It is, moreover, wrong on the part of those who seek reference to
            > an
            > intermediate becoming (antaraabhava.m) by seizing upon the phrase
            > ubhayamantarena [in both]. For the existence of an intermediate
            > becoming is altogether rejected in the Abhidhamma. ....Furthermore,
            >
            > those who still say that there is an intermediate becoming by
            > seizing
            > unmethodically upon the meaning of such sutta-passages as ‘An
            > antaraaparinibbaayin’ (eg Aiv70ff) and ‘Those who are become or
            > those
            > seeking becoming’(Khp8) are to be rebuffed with ‘there is no (such
            >
            > thing)’, since the meaning of the former sutta passage is that he is
            >
            > an antaraaparinibbaayin since he attains parinibbaana
            > (parinibbaayati) by way of remainderles defilement-parinibbana
            > through attaining the topmost path midway (antaraa)[in
            > lifespan]....,
            > whilst the meaning of the latter (sutta-passage) is that those who,
            >
            > in the former word, are spoken of as ‘those who are
            > become’ (bhuutaa), are those in whom the asavas have been destroyed,
            >
            > being those who are merely become, (but) who will not become (again,
            >
            > (whereas the latter,) being the antithesis thereof, (and spoken of
            >
            > as) ‘those seeking becoming’ (sambhavesino) since it is becoming
            > (sambhava.m) that they seek (esenti), are sekhas and puthujjanas on
            >
            > account of the fetters giving rise to becoming not having been
            > abandoned....”
            > “For when there is a straightforward meaning that follows the
            > (canonical) Pali, what business is there in postulating an
            > intermediate becoming of unspecified capacity?”>
            > End quote.
            > ---------
            > So, the point is, that we at this moment cannot give up clinging to
            >
            > life, we still want to be reborn. The arahat is not so, he has
            > become
            > but is not seeking to be born again. Thus in the quoted passage the
            >
            > difference between the non-arahat and arahat is shown.
            > Just in this context the term bhuuta is used in this way.
            > Nina.
            >
            > Op 24-aug-2006, om 11:53 heeft Piya Tan het volgende geschreven:
            >
            > > That "bhuuta" refers to arhats is most interesting: do you
            > > references for this?
            >
            >
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >
            >
            >
            > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
            > Paa.li-Parisaa - The Pali Collective
            > [Homepage] http://www.tipitaka.net
            > [Files] http://www.geocities.com/paligroup/
            > [Send Message] pali@yahoogroups.com
            > Yahoo! Groups members can set their delivery options to daily digest
            > or web only.
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >



            Piya Tan
            Email: dharmafarer@...
          • Nina van Gorkom
            Dear Piya, Thank you for your kind post. I do appreciate your openmindedness and the fact that you signed up for Rob s study forum. Nina. ... [Non-text
            Message 5 of 18 , Aug 28, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              Dear Piya,
              Thank you for your kind post. I do appreciate your openmindedness and
              the fact that you signed up for Rob's study forum.
              Nina.
              Op 28-aug-2006, om 4:06 heeft Piya Tan het volgende geschreven:

              > I have also just signed up for the Abhidhamma Vipassana Forum to
              > get a balanced learning process. We have so much to learn from both
              > the Vipassana tradition and the Forest tradition.



              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.