Re: [dsg] Re: Tiika Vis 80, no 1 (English)
- Hi Larry,
op 31-05-2004 20:23 schreef Larry op LBIDD@...:
> I think the commentator may have misunderstood this passage:N: I am always very, very hesitant to say this ;-))
L: "'The visible-data base, the sound base, the odour base, the flavour
> base, the tangible-data base, the space element, the water element,N: Two different matters: what is originated and what is perceived through
> lightness of matter, malleability of matter, wieldiness of matter,
> growth of matter, continuity of matter, and physical food--these
> states are consciousness-originated' (cf. Dhs. 667)"
> These rupas are not consciousness originated but rather mind-door
> perceived rupas.
We have to think of the four factors that originate. Here, lightness etc are
only originated by citta, temperature and nutrition, as we learnt before.
The others of this list above are originated by all four. Remember: visible
object or colour of rupas of the body is originated by all four.
Then see the discussion as to growth and continuity, that I rendered. These,
in a sense can, be produced by all four if we think of the moment the four
factors set them in motion.
- Dear Nina,
Thank you so much for providing all this detail. I need time to absorb it
and look at references too.
--- nina van gorkom <nilo@...> wrote: > Tiika Vis 80, no 1
> 80. But 'matter as characteristic' is called 'not born of anything'.
> Why? Because there is no arising of arising, and the other two are the
> mere maturing and breakup of what has arisen.
S: Im thinking that this and your following comments and references are
of relevance to the discussion on birth as dukkha and the comments I
gave from the Sammohavinodani.
> As we have seen there are four rupas as characteristics: origination,
> continuity, decay and impermanence. These are inherent in all groups of
> rupa. Since they are
> characteristics, they are not originated by any of the four causes that
> originate rupas. Strictly speaking, there is no arising of arising,
> from another viewpoint it can be said (it is allowable as the Vis text
> states) that when kamma and the other three causes originate rupas, they
> also cause the arising (or birth) of the characteristics of origination
> continuity which are bound up with the other rupas in a group.
S: In the Sammohavinodani 452 it gives many meanings of jaati (birth) in
different contexts. In the context of the First Noble Truth, it gives:
Here, however, this is appropriate in respect of the aggregates of first
production with their modes [vikaaresu]. Therefore jaati is by way of
being born; here it is the peculiarity of their nature. Sa~njaati coming
to birth is by the act of coming to birth.
Im inclined to think the Vism and Tika references here may be relevant,
though of course they are only referring to the vikaara rupas here as
characteristics of rupas. As it says, Strictly speaking, there is no
arising of arising.
I dont wish to push this too far......
S: The comments from the other texts were very interesting:
> We read in the Co to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha (p. 243): <Therefore the<...>
> ancients have said:
> In the text [of the Abhidhamma] the generation of birth from some cause
> [stated] from a particular standpoint (pariyaayato); since in these
> [birth, decay, impermanence] the intrinsic nature of conditioned things
> [found], they have been said to be conditioned.1 > It is also stated in
> Expositor that birth, decay and death happen bound up with the bases
> rupas of solidity, the other four great Elements and the other rupas).
> these rupas appear, birth, decay and death are revealed.
> From these discussions we learn that there are different methods of
> explanation (pariyaaya).
> Tiika Vis 80;....
> As to the expression, matter as characteristic is called 3not born from
> anything2, because they are not arisen from any cause...
> How should it be understood that materiality as characteristic does not
> Because it is without that characteristic.
> N: It is itself the characteristic of arising etc. and therefore it does
> have the characteristic of arising.
> In the texts about origination of visible object and so on, the
> characteristics of birth etc. are to be found, but not (the
> of) birth (arising) etc. itself.
> Therefore, it should be known that arising etc, does not arise, etc. ..
> N: Origination, being a characteristic, does not arise.
S: there is a real wealth of detail in the Tiika passages here. Extremely
profound and precious imho;-).
Metta and anumodana.
p.s. You mentioned a short trip - I hope you have good weather and a nice
break from the computer.
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @... address at http://mail.english.yahoo.com.hk