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

Re:(3) Anattta and Kamma and Conventional Events(? at end)

Expand Messages
  • kenhowardau <kenhowardau@yahoo.com.au>
    Hi Shakti, ... pleasant or unpleasant. Why no neutral here??? ... As I understand it, experiences at the five sense doors are always either pleasant or
    Message 1 of 52 , Mar 1, 2003
      Hi Shakti,

      ----------
      > . . . but I am not clear about the physical being only
      pleasant or unpleasant. Why no neutral here??? >
      -----------

      As I understand it, experiences at the five sense doors
      are always either pleasant or unpleasant. Moreover, the
      object experienced is always either a pleasant or an
      unpleasant object. At first glance, this is counter-
      intuitive; we think that pleasantness and unpleasantness
      must be subjective judgements made at the mind door.
      But after a little reflection, it all becomes clear and
      reasonable.

      I find it helpful to look at it in terms of kamma and
      vipaka: Whether an action is kusala or akusala must be a
      matter of absolute reality. (Even though, to our thinking
      minds, it is not always clear which is which.)
      Furthermore, the results of kamma must always match the
      cause; pleasant results must come from kusala kamma and
      unpleasant results must come from akusala kamma.

      Also, it is proper and natural that pleasant feelings
      should accompany pleasant vipaka and unpleasant feelings
      should accompany unpleasant vipaka. And this is how it
      is -- at the body door.

      So, the question ceases to be, 'why is feeling at the
      body door always either pleasant or unpleasant?' I think
      we might well ask, 'why are feelings at the other sense
      doors, neutral?' I gather it is simply because those
      other four bases lack the sensitivity to detect the
      differences in physical feelings.

      Hoping this is right,
      Ken H

      PS After writing this, I notice your question has already
      been comprehensively answered. I'll post it anyway, as a
      way of keeping in touch.
      kh
    • Jonothan Abbott
      Howard, Sarah and Larry Thanks to Sarah for reminding me of Larry s post, and thanks to Larry for going to the trouble to find the right reference, and for
      Message 52 of 52 , Mar 12, 2003
        Howard, Sarah and Larry

        Thanks to Sarah for reminding me of Larry's post, and thanks to Larry
        for going to the trouble to find the right reference, and for setting
        out the sutta. (I did notice Larry's post at the time and meant to
        come back to it, but obviously forgot all about it later.)

        Here is a translation of the same passage by Bhikkhu Bodhi, together
        with a translation of the commentary on the meaning of the 4 terms in
        question, here translated as 'actuality', 'inerrancy',
        'nototherwiseness' and 'specific conditionality':

        "Thus, monks, the actuality in this, the inerrancy, the
        nototherwiseness, specific conditionality: this is called dependent
        origination.[54]"

        [54], p742, from the commentary:
        "Actuality (tathataa) is said to indicate the occurrence of each
        particular phenomenon when its assemblage of appropriate conditions
        is present.
        Inerrancy (avitathataa) means that once its conditions have reached
        completeness there is no non occurrence, even for a moment, of the
        phenomenon due to be produced from those conditions.
        Nototherwiseness (ana~n~nathataa) means that there is no production
        of one phenomenon by another's conditions.
        The phrase specific conditionality [idappaccayataa] is used to refer
        to the (individual) conditions for ageing and death etc., or to the
        conditions taken as a group (paccayasamuuhato)."

        Just for information.

        Jon

        --- Sarah <sarahdhhk@...> wrote: > Hi Jon & Howard,
        >
        > I think the extract from Larry's post pasted below should help.
        > Sarah
        > *****
        ...
        > Larry wrote:
        ...
        > L:>Here is the sutta Kalupahana referenced:
        ...
        > Below is the relevant section. I inserted the pali. The translation
        > is slightly different:

        "Now what is dependent co-arising?
        From birth as a requisite condition comes aging & death.
        ...
        From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications.
        Whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property
        stands -- thisregularity of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the
        Dhamma, this this/thatconditionality.
        The Tathagata directly awakens to that, breaks through to that.
        Directly awakening & breaking through to that, he declares it,
        teaches it, describes it, sets it forth.
        He reveals it, explains it, makes it plain, & says, 'Look.'
        From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications.
        What's there in this way is a reality [TATHATAA], not an unreality
        [AVITATHATAA], not other than what it seems [ANA~N~NATHATAA],
        conditioned by this/that [IDAPPACCAYATAA].
        This is called dependent co-arising."


        _______________________________________________________________________
        Do You Yahoo!?
        Get your free @... address at http://mail.english.yahoo.com.hk
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.