- Dear Josh,
You wrote to Herman:
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "jrg493" <uriopollu@...> wrote:
> But reading this led to me question if I understand Abhidhamma's teaching on rupa properly. I must admit that rupa (as well as the 24 patthana) is an area I haven't delved into as deeply as I have cittas & cetasikas, but I have went this far in my studies understanding the upadaya rupas to be reducible, ultimately, to the four mahabhutas, while at the same time occurring in the flow of experience as definite "wholes" &, therefore, serving as paramattha dhammas also.
S: The upadaya rupas depend on the 4 mahabhuta rupas, but they are paramattha dhammas with their particular distinct characteristics. They cannot be reduced to other rupas. For example, sound is an upadaya (derived) rupa. It cannot arise without the 4 mahabuta rupas, but it cannot be 'reduced' to earth, air, fire or water. Not sure what you mean as "definite 'wholes'" so will leave that.
> Now my questions are:
> Are upadaya rupas ultimately reducible to mahabhutas?
S: No. They are dependent on the mahabhutas for arising. An example I've seen is of how trees depend on the earth to describe how upadaya rupas depend on mahabhuta rupas
There are 8 rupas which arise in every group (kalapa) or rupas and these include the mahabhuta rupas.
> If so, is there a subtle similarity between how upadaya rupas & mahabhutas relate compared with how cittas & cetasikas relate? It is something I am picking up on.
S: Rather similar - the upadaya rupas arise by sahajata (conascence)* condition, nissaya (dependence) condition and other conditions, just as cetasikas arise with citta by sahajata, nissaya, a~n~nama~n~na (mutual support) and other conditions too. Citta is the chief in experiencing.
Nina wrote the following before:
N: Gaining a footing: is supported by: nissaya-paccaya. One of the
many conditions. Cetasikas support the citta they accompany. See my
book on conditions, p. 47:
< The dependence-condition, nissaya-paccaya, refers to realities
which condition other realities by being their support or foundation.
We read in the "Visuddhimagga" (XVII, 79) about dependence-condition,
which is here translated as support-condition:
"A state (dhamma) that assists in the mode of foundation and in the
mode of support is a support-condition, as the earth is for trees, as
canvas is for paintings, and so on."
This type of condition refers to phenomena which are conascent
(arising together) with the phenomena they condition as well as to
phenomena which have arisen previously to the phenomena they condition.
We read in the "Pa.t.thåna" (Analytical Exposition, 8) as to the
dependence-condition for conascent phenomena:
"1. The four immaterial khandhas are mutually related to one another
As to the first class, the four nåmakkhandhas are mutually related to
one another by conascent dependence-condition: citta and cetasikas
always arise together and they are depending on one another. Citta
cannot arise without cetasikas and cetasikas cannot arise without
citta. As we have seen, they are also related to one another by way
of conascence, sahajåta, and by way of mutuality, aññamañña.
The teaching of dependence-condition, nissaya paccaya, reminds us
that citta and cetasikas need one another to perform their functions.
Citta is the "chief" in cognizing an object, and cetasikas share the
same object while they perform each their own function. Feeling,
vedanå, and remembrance, saññå, are cetasikas which arise with each
citta. Citta is different from cetasika, it does not feel or
remember; citta cognizes or knows the object. ...>
> Assuming I'm not way out to lunch here, it would seem that there is a subtle distinction in the way that component parts can themselves serve as elements of experience while at the same time forming complexes which occur as new, though derivable elements of the same experience. The pain of embarrassment, for instance, is truly felt & is therefore real but the way the dialogue internally occurs in the mind that gives rise to such embarrassment is based on unreal things.
> Your thoughts?
S: When we refer to the "pain of embarrassment", it's a story about a situation reflecting all sorts of different realities. Moments of vipaka cittas followed by long stories with aversion and so on.
* Phil, caught my auto-corrector trying to put "conscience" back in again, but was on the look out for 'him' (as Pt would say), this time....
- Good friends all,
On this mere excerpt:> So for me, dhamma is all three pitakas (though I'm obviously not a
> bhikkhu, so much of the vinaya is not applicable). And I figure if itComments???
> exists in there, it *could* be useful. The Theras seem to think so.As a former bhikkhu, I strongly suggest lay persons become familiar with the Vinaya-pitaka. Just the areas between the monk and the lay person... It will prevent many misunderstandings...
yours in Dhamma-vinaya,
Chuck (formerly phra dhammasaro)
............................ Rest deleted as requested ....................................................................................................................
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]