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

126770Re: [dsg] conditions for understanding to arise

Expand Messages
  • sarah
    Sep 28, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Jagkrit, (Alex, Wojtek, Alberto, Pt & all),

      --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jagkrit2012" <jagkrit2012@...> wrote:

      > > However, I wonder where is the fine line between substantial thinking vs delirious thinking? What is the criterion we can use as awareness during reading or discussing dhamma which can be self reminder when no one around to keep us in the line?
      S: Only pa~n~naa can know - whenever there is sa~n~naa vipallassa, perversion of sa~n~naa, with any akusala cittas, it's "delirious".

      Like whenever there's trying to get anything for oneself or whenever there is the idea of thing or person, it's there.

      Here's an extract from the Mulapariyaaya Sutta commentary, MN1 (transl by B.Bodhi):

      "..it is said: 'he perceives as a segment of earth.' 'Seizing upon the conventional expression': in this way the commentator shows that the perception of characteristic earth also occurs through the medium of the conventional expression.

      "Objection: If the conventional expression is applied, what is the fault? Don't ariyans also make use of the conventional expression, as when they say: 'This, venerable sir, is the great earth.' etc?

      "Reply: It is not the mere employment of the expression that is intended here, but the wrong adherence which occurs through the conventional expression. Thus he says: 'he perceives through a perversion of perception.' This is the meaning: He perceives it as beautiful, etc., through a perverted perception springing from unwise reflection. By this, weak conceiving through craving, conceit and views is shown.

      "If so, it may be asked, why is perception mentioned? Because it is evident. Just as, when a fire is smoldering and smoke is seen, although the fire still exists, we say 'there is smoke' rather than 'there is fire,' because the smoke is more evident; in an analogous way, although conceiving is already exercising its function (in this perception), this function is not distinct. The function of perception alone is distinct, for perception is more evident. But this perception accords with the conceiving and works in conjunction with the latter; therefore he says: 'he perceives through a perversion of perception.' And when it is said that he perceives it thinking 'it is earth,' he means that, without releasing a segment of earth from among these four kinds, he perceives what is in its true nature devoid of self, etc., as endowed with a self, etc., like one perceiving a lump on the head as a piece of gold."
      S: Anytime the pathavii dhaatu, the hardness/softness/tangible object experienced is perceived as some thing, not an element or dhamma, there is atta sa~n~naa.

      "Having perceived earth thus with a perverted perception, the worldling afterwards conceives it, i.e., construes or discriminates it, through the strengthened proliferating tendencies of craving, conceit, and views, which are here called 'conceivings' (aparabhaage thaamapatthi ta.nhaamaanadi.t.thipapa~ncehi idha ma~n~nanaanaamena vuttehi ma~n~nati kappeti vikappeti). This accords with the statement: 'Concepts due to proliferation are grounded upon perception' (su~n~naanidaanaa hi papa~ncasa"nkhaa, Sn 874). He apprehends it in diverse ways contrary (to reality) (naanappakaarato a~n~nathaa ga.haati)."
      S: Through the conceiving, through the marking by sa~n~naa to the signs and details (nimitta anubya~ncana) with lobha and di.t.thi, reality is not seen as it is.

      When there is the development of understanding and awareness, gradually there is not so much of the usual attending to all these details with more and more lobha proliferation. Gradually the nimitta of reality is understood.


    • Show all 25 messages in this topic