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

Re: [dsg] Re: The Buddha & His Disciples Are Not Concepts

Expand Messages
  • Sukinder
    Hi Howard, ... What kind of cause /effect are you pointing at, conditionality, kamma / vipaka or is it accumulated tendencies? ... The interrelationship
    Message 1 of 483 , May 7, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Howard,


      > > > HCW:
      > > > Of course. Not all relationships are at a single moment.
      > > >
      > >
      > > Do you mean such things as kamma condition?
      > ------------------------------
      > HCW:
      > Sure, that. And much more. Even events early on in this life affect
      > how we respond now and what comes to us now.
      >

      What kind of cause /effect are you pointing at, conditionality, kamma /
      vipaka or is it accumulated tendencies?


      > -----------------------------
      > > So what is it exactly?
      > -----------------------------
      > HCW:
      > What is *what*?
      > ----------------------------
      >


      The "interrelationship" which the "staccato, freeze-frame perspective"
      fails to cover. What exactly are involved in the interrelationship and
      which concept in the Dhamma it corresponds with?


      > > > HCW:
      > > > Things no longer existing can affect currently arising things.
      > > >
      > >
      > > Do you mean for example pre-nascence and absence condition?
      > -----------------------------------
      > HCW:
      > Sure! And there is no need to presume that prenascence condition
      > reduces to contiguity condition.
      >

      There are 24 conditions, I don't remember most of them, but I do believe
      that they are all different. Saying that conditionality happens in the
      moment does not imply that there is only one type of condition, namely
      contiguity condition. That one kind of dhamma arises before another
      dhamma still points to the conditioning / conditioned relationship that
      happens in the moment. Even in the case of asynchronous kamma-condition,
      the kammaja rupa or vipaka citta arises as a result of the coming
      together of different realities, in the moment.


      > > OK, So what exactly is the correct notion?
      >
      > > The basic idea I was trying to get across in the above, is that dhammas
      > > rise and fall away each conditioning the other while performing their
      > > particular functions, this very well illustrate not only
      > conditionality,
      > > but also impermanence and non-self. Also it explains how things appear
      > > as they are in the conventional world.
      > ----------------------------------
      > HCW:
      > Here, it seems to me, that you are presuming that all conditionality
      > reduces to contiguity. I do not presume this.
      >

      So are you referring to the 24 conditions when you talk about the idea
      of "interrelationship"? Why would you do this here on DSG, where more
      than anywhere else, conditionality is emphasized? It seems to me that
      you are talking about something else, something which we in fact never
      take into account. So again I ask, what is this "interrelationship"
      about? My first impression was similar to Ken H's, namely that you are
      making a case for some kind of "self".


      > > And I'l state here, that any other explanation will not only be
      > > unsatisfactory, but in fact end up contradicting some of the basic
      > > concepts of the Dhamma.
      > ----------------------------------
      > HCW:
      > You'll state here that this is how it is rather than this is how you
      > *believe* it is? Okay - it's nice to be a truth knower! ;-)
      >

      You mean if I say "I believe" that would give credibility to what I say?
      Is there a place for doubt in the Dhamma? Either one understands at the
      level of pariyatti, patipatti or pativedha and knows it, or one does not
      understand at all.

      Metta,

      Sukin


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • jonoabb
      Hi Rob E RE: Hi Jon. RE: I will get into the next part about the Satipatthana sutta later, as I need to look at it to continue the discussion. J: Glad to
      Message 483 of 483 , Oct 1, 2013
      • 0 Attachment

        Hi Rob E

         

        RE: Hi Jon. 


        > RE: I will get into the next part about the Satipatthana sutta later, as I need to look at it to continue the discussion.


        > J:  Glad to hear you'll be checking out the text of the sutta for a change!! :-))


        RE:

        :-)  I appreciate what I desperately hope is your humor here, and if so, is very funny. 


        I will get back to you with the usual sutta quotes as soon as I can.  :-)


        Very very funny, Jon.   ; - /


        Best,

        Rob  E.


        - - - - - - - - - -


        J:  You may have forgotten in the confusion over the new format that you have already come back with a quote from the Satipatthana Sutta.  My reply to your message can be found here:

        http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/dhammastudygroup/conversations/messages/133161


        Jon

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