This is quite obscure:
"An example: someone speaks harsh words to us. In the ultimate sense
there is not he who speaks, there is not me who hears. Hearing is
vipaakacitta conditioned by past kamma. It was the right time for
kamma to produce result. How could another person be blamed? The real
cause of trouble is not another person, it is by 'myself'. Right
understanding of naama and ruupa conditions most of all kind speech,
restraint from harsh speech."
D. G. D. C. Wijeratna
________________________________
From: Nina van Gorkom <
vangorko@...>
To:
Pali@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sun, December 20, 2009 2:01:57 PM
Subject: Re: [Pali] Re: Was the Buddha Obliged to Observe Vinaya Rules?, no 2.
Venerable Pandita,
Op 18-dec-2009, om 6:04 heeft ashinpan het volgende geschreven:
> Yes, I should have been more specific here since my writing as it
> is seems to imply that only celibate monks and nuns can follow the
> Buddha's teaching, which is not the case. I should have said, e.g.,
> "those who wish to dedicate their lives to his path". (I happen to
> know a professor who cites Dhammacakkappavatta na sutta to claim
> that meditation is only for monks and nuns only! But we shouldn't
> take offence with academics, I think.)
>
> > N: ....The affliction used in the sutta is an example in
> conventional
> > sense to help people see that the khandhas, or, nama and rupa, are
> > mere fleeting elements. They have each their own characteristic >
> and
> > appear one at a time through the six doorways.
> > Affliction is not merely sickness and death in conventional sense,
> > the end of a lifespan, but kha.nika mara.na, momentary death, the
> > falling away of each naama and ruupa that arises. Their
> impermanence.
-------
>
> I agree with your understanding of anattaa. However, in this
> context, what we need to see is how the concept of anattaa
> influences the formation of Vinaya rules or monastic life. I can
> see such an influence only when affliction is interpreted in a
> conventional sense, as I give in my paper. Can you see any other
> sort of influence by interpreting it as "momentary death"?
--------
N:I shall try to explain, but have to go slowly. I shall come to this
later on.
The Buddha spoke both in conventional sense and in the absolute
sense. Whenever I read about conventional truth I am personally
inclined to look for the deeper meaning, the meaning in paramattha
sense. The latter is most beneficial for kusala siila in daily life.
It is avijjaa, ignorance of paramattha dhammas that causes so much
misery in the world.
I reread your text in order to better understand what you are
pointing at. You pointed to: Affliction in the sense of moral
degeneration of the Order, and the way to remedy this, by the
monastic code.
Quote:
<3. If the Order would certainly degenerate, the monastic code, if
kept in the
discretion of the Order, would degenerate too, leaving little chance
for the
posterity. On the contrary, if the monastic code can be maintained
free from
the whims and fancies of the Order, at least a minority of good monks
would
be able to follow it and get benefits even if the majority is corrupt
beyond all
repair. The Buddha appears like a doctor who gives professional help
as long
as he can to a terminally ailing patient yet who refuses to refer him
to any
unqualified person. >
--------
N: We can look at the Order and the monastic code in a conventional
way and see affliction in a conventional way. That is true. However,
not losing out of sight the absolute truth, the truth of paramattha
dhammas, can have a powerful influence, it can mean the true medicine
to cure moral degeneration.
Ruupakkhandha is not merely the body, it is a collection, a group of
all material phenomena, 'past, future or present, internal or
external.... ' (M. III, 16). All sense objects to which we cling, such
as colour, sound, flavour etc. are included in ruupakkhandha. They
arise and then fall away, that is their 'affliction' .
The body is a concept of a whole, it does not exist in the ultimate
sense. It consists of many kinds of ruupa elements produced by kamma,
citta, ahaara and heat. These can be known as they appear one at a
time through the appropriate doorways. Insight, vipassanaa pa~n~naa
can be developed of realities, one at a time. Through vipassanaa we
can learn that what we take for a person, a self or a thing, are only
momentary phenomena, arising and falling away. In that sense we could
say that there is birth and death at each moment.
The notion of affliction or disease is to be applied to all five
khandhas, nama and rupa. It is an aspect of dukkha, it reminds us not
to cling to nama and rupa, they are like a disease, a boil, a piece
of foam. The sutta teaches that anattaaness of the khandhas means:
the khandhas have no owner, they cannot be controlled or directed by
a self.
It reminds us that the Path is a Path leading to detachment, from the
beginning until the end. The function of vipassanaa pa~n~naa is
detachment from the idea of self and eventually from all realities.
Vipassanaa can greatly influence siila, including indriya sa"mvara
siila, guarding of the sense-doors.
Mindfulness guards the doors of the senses and the mind-door.
Whenever there is mindfulness of visible object that appears and this
is realized as only a ruupa appearing through the eyedoor, we are not
infatuated by this object, there are no lobha, dosa or moha on
account of it.
Mindfulness is an indriya, a " controlling faculty", a "leader' of
the citta and accompanying cetasikas in its function of heedfulness,
of non-forgetfulness of what is wholesome. We read in the Expositor
((I, Part IV, Ch II< 147):
<... It exercises government (over associated states) in the
characteristic of presenting or illuminating the object- this is the
faculty of mindfulness. >
An example: someone speaks harsh words to us. In the ultimate sense
there is not he who speaks, there is not me who hears. Hearing is
vipaakacitta conditioned by past kamma. It was the right time for
kamma to produce result. How could another person be blamed? The real
cause of trouble is not another person, it is by 'myself'. Right
understanding of naama and ruupa conditions most of all kind speech,
restraint from harsh speech.
------------ -
(to be continued)
with respect,
Nina.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]