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

Re:4NT = Religious Psychology

Expand Messages
  • truth_aerator
    Hi Sukin, all, ... That only mind/consciousness can experience negative emotions and bodily pain. In another context, by suffering is in the mind, I mean
    Message 1 of 299 , Dec 6, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Sukin, all,

      >S:What do you mean by "Suffering is in the mind"?
      >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


      That only mind/consciousness can experience negative emotions and bodily pain.

      In another context, by suffering is in the mind, I mean emotional suffering due to kilesas as opposed to mere bodily pain that even the Buddha can have.

      >S:Are you saying that the First Noble Truth is reference to mental >suffering?
      >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

      A: All three types of sufferings: Dukkha-Dukkha, viparinama-dukkha, and sankhara dukkha.




      >S:Of course it is not. It is a reference to conditioned nama and >rupa.
      >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

      Conditioned namarupa is included within sankhara dukkha.


      >S:But even if it is about mental suffering, this is not "*in* the >mind", but is a mental reality. The way you phrase it appears to be >so as to accommodate your view that the Four Noble Truths is >psychology.
      >>>>>>>>>>>>


      A: Yes, suffering is mental phenomenon and it is uprooted in the mind.
      Pain, though, can be as long as the body lives, but not mental suffering about it.


      >S:And yes, lobha, dosa and moha are mental realities, but there is >no "person who can engage in harmful behavior to himself and >others".
      >>>>>>>>>>>>>>

      A: Speaking conventionally, there is a person. There just isn't Atta.

      =================================================
      "And which is the carrier of the burden? 'The person,' it should be said. This venerable one with such a name, such a clan-name. This is called the carrier of the burden.
      http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.022.than.html
      ===================================================



      >S: Inference is inference. But lobha, dosa and moha are conditioned >realities which can be directly experienced by panna, and the field >of psychology does not teach this.
      >>>>>>>>>>>>>

      Buddhist psychology does.


      > ===
      > > >Were the Buddha's teachings reducible to psychology, then studying >it as one does any other field of study, would be O.K. But is >studying the Dhamma about thinking in the abstract and then seeking >to apply the theory, which in fact is just more thinking about >concepts? I don't think so.
      > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


      Right. Buddha's teaching is all about practice, not book learning. Otherwise it is like theoretic philosophy. Sounds wise, but useless in actual life.


      > S: I think what you mean is that it does not believe in the >existence of "soul". Buddhist meditators don't believe in soul >either and they will tell you that there is no 'self'. But clearly >they are motivated by self-view in their interpretation of the >Buddha's teachings.
      >>>>>>>>>>>>>>

      Prove it. Suttas and Commentaries are filled with instructions "to do" and "to avoid". Without practice, Buddhism is just a useless philosophy that may not even be higher than more modern and advanced western philosophy.


      > > Also, puggala (which is Anatta) is not denied.
      >
      > S: Puggalavadins are not followers of the Dhamma.
      >>>>>>>>>>>

      How do you know? Maybe certain kinds of Theravada got it all wrong, and Puggalavadins (who I understand where anattavadins) got it right?


      ====================
      "And which is the carrier of the burden? 'The person,' it should be said. This venerable one with such a name, such a clan-name. This is called the carrier of the burden.
      http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.022.than.html
      ==============================


      >S: If cause and effect between dhammas is understood to any extent, then development of understanding must be seen as happening over not just multiple, but countless lifetimes. Otherwise it does not make sense.
      >


      The suttas say that at least path of stream entry can occur in this life if one understands or believes in anicca.

      At Savatthi. "Monks, the eye is inconstant, changeable, alterable. The ear... The nose... The tongue... The body... The mind is inconstant, changeable, alterable.

      "One who has conviction & belief that these phenomena are this way is called a faith-follower: one who has entered the orderliness of rightness, entered the plane of people of integrity, transcended the plane of the run-of-the-mill. He is incapable of doing any deed by which he might be reborn in hell, in the animal womb, or in the realm of hungry shades. He is incapable of passing away until he has realized the fruit of stream-entry.

      "One who, after pondering with a modicum of discernment, has accepted that these phenomena are this way is called a Dhamma-follower: one who has entered the orderliness of rightness, entered the plane of people of integrity, transcended the plane of the run-of-the-mill. He is incapable of doing any deed by which he might be reborn in hell, in the animal womb, or in the realm of hungry shades. He is incapable of passing away until he has realized the fruit of stream-entry.
      http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn25/sn25.001.than.html
      and other 9 suttas in SN25.













      > ===
      > > A good simile: Lets say that person keeps going up and down parallel to the goal which is to the right. A Person under mistaken understanding can go up and down for a long long time, but if that person had correct understanding, he could step to the right and reach the goal.
      > >
      >
      >
      > S: Wrong View is eradicated by the Path consciousness of the >Sotapanna.
      >>>>>>>>>>>>>

      A: And this requires practice of right view.

      >Alex:We can't prove beyond any doubt that Buddha as historical >person even existed.
      >==================================================
      >S:Buddha refers to the Awakened One. This can be understood even at >the intellectual level, as being the end result of a very special >kind of wisdom.
      >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

      A: Same could be said about, lets say, Jesus.


      >Alex: We can't prove beyond any doubt that even if Buddha did exist that He was fully Awakened.
      >=============================================
      >S: You are not studying the Dhamma, but history.
      >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

      So you merely believe? Why not believe in Jesus?




      >Alex: We can't prove beyond any doubt that even if Buddha did exist >and that He was fully Awakened, that He didn't use skillful means.
      >================================================
      >S:The Teachings are there for you and I to refer to.
      >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

      A: Which teachings? Sarvastivadin? Puggalavadin? Sutrantika? Yogacara? Chan? Zen? Tibetan (which lineage?) Theravadin?


      >S:The first step is pariyatti understanding or suttamaya panna. This >itself is ehipassiko and the basis for increased saddha. Without it >there can't be patipatti understanding or bhavanamaya panna.
      >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


      A: Which pariyatti? Sarvastivadin? Puggalavadin? Sutrantika? Yogacara? Chan? Zen? Tibetan (which lineage?) Theravadin?



      With best wishes,

      Alex
    • sarah
      Hi Howard, ... S: It means that whilst the arahat lives, all the khandhas, all the conditioned elements (taken for the arahat) continue to arise and fall away.
      Message 299 of 299 , Mar 4, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Howard,

        --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote:

        > > S: As Jon wrote in another recent post: "Dukkha is a characteristic of all conditioned dhammas. As long as there is life in samsara, there is dukkha (even for the arahant).
        > ------------------------------------
        > HCW:
        > What does it mean for there to be dukkha FOR the arahant?
        > ------------------------------------

        S: It means that whilst the arahat lives, all the khandhas, all the conditioned elements (taken for the arahat) continue to arise and fall away. Each of these elements is dukkha.
        ....
        > >S: "Dukkha is ended only when parinibbana is attained."
        > -------------------------------------
        > HCW:
        > If one experiences no dissatisfaction, why should one care whether dhammas are not sources of satisfaction?
        > ---------------------------------------
        S: That's the point. When attachment and ignorance have been eradicated, there is no more caring or searching for satisfaction, no more conditions for rebirth. The job is done.
        ....
        > > S: Yes, for the arahat, no more tanha, no more dissatisfaction, no more mental suffering, but still "sabbe sankhara dukkha"
        > ----------------------------------
        > HCW:
        > Who cares? All that means is that conditioned phenomena are among the conditions for dissatisfaction. But without avijja and tanha, they are insufficient conditions.
        > ---------------------------------

        S: It's not a matter of caring, but of understanding the Truths. The first Noble Truth is that all conditioned dhammas are dukkha. The Truth is universal.
        ....

        > > S: When arahathood has been attained, the job is done. Do you agree that if all defilements are eradicated, at the end of the arahat's life, at parinibbana, there are no more conditions for dhammas to arise?
        > -----------------------------
        > HCW:
        > I agree that when all defilements have been eradicated, there are, right then and there, no sufficient conditions for dissatisfaction to arise, and it will not ever arise. It is then irrelevant whether conditioned dhammas arise or not.
        > -------------------------------

        S: Even for the anagami there are no more conditions for any dissatisfaction, however slight, to arise again. When attachment is finally eradicated, no more conditions for further birth.
        ...
        > > ....
        > > > It is not the mere presence or ending of conditioned dhammas that leads to suffering, but craving, aversion, and clinging, and without these, existence is nibbanic and joyful.
        > > ...
        > > S: Craving, aversion and ignorance have been eradicated because all the perversions of view, memory and consciousness have been eradicated.
        > -----------------------------
        > HCW:
        > So?
        ....
        S: You continue to suggest that when there is no craving or aversion, such as during the arahat's life or now at moments when they don't arise, that there is no suffering. I'm pointing out that the deeper meaning of dukkha, sankhara dukkha, as taught by the Buddha and referred to in the 1st Noble Truth, applies to all conditioned dhammas. So even the khandhas of the arahat are dukkha. The arahat has no more illusion, unlike us, that the dhamma arising now is sukkha rather than dukkha. The nature of dukkha of all conditioned phenomena is completely understood.
        > -------------------------------
        >>S: There is no more illusion of any kind that the impermanent is permanent, the non-self is self, the foul is beautiful or what is dukkha (unsatisfactory or suffering) is sukha (happy).
        > ------------------------------
        > HCW:
        > Yes. So?
        > -----------------------------
        S: So all conditioned dhammas are anicca, anatta, asubha and dukkha.
        ...
        Metta

        Sarah
        =====
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.