Attavada(a sense of self) is a problem because it assumes an external point of view to your experience. And that's a contradiction in terms because you can't have anything outside of your experience. Pure gold, thank you.
I am alone with the Dhamma. There is no one here to discuss it. These are priceless to me, as are all the videos-- the gift of Dhamma. I often must listen more than once because happiness with hearing the Dhamma interferes with attending to the meaning. Replay is good! 😊
Such a joy, such a joy!! These days have been incredible, going back and forth rewatching your videos gives me so much insight, even those I thought I had already extracted all there was to be extracted, when I come back, I come out with so much more! I remember coming across this discussion and literally not understanding a thing. Now I was able to follow through all of it and UNDERSTAND. How incredible to understand arising and ceasing in a phenomenological manner. I couldn't understand the profoundity of this when I first heard, even the other times when I rewatched this discussion, but now I can see. This channel is so precious, I've haven't come across anything of such high quality anywhere, I would be devasted if anything happened to it. I'm sure there are others like me who are benefitting a lot from these talks.
🙏🏼Sadhu❣️Intense dhamma interrogation. Who was the Venerable being cross-examined? I thought he did well. It is enriching for others to whiteness someone amend their view without fierce resistance. An example for many to follow.
There are many instances in the suttapiṭaka where ariya savaka receive clarification on a specific aspect of the teaching in which they have sufficient understanding to have Right View, but are missing an overlooked connective thread that further tightens their personal dhamma basket.
Can this concept of impermanence, as described through the three characteristics, be extrapolated to explain why pleasant feelings cannot be assumed as our own without also assuming liability to suffering? As Ajahn Nyanamoli has said before, we never really observe the point at which a phenomena first arises or fully ceases. Couldn't it then be said that, rather than having multiple distinct feelings that give way to one another, what we really have is a single feeling that changes while persisting? In other words, would it be fair to say that the "pleasant" and "unpleasant" feelings we tend to see as fundamentally distinct are actually the same "piece of wet clay" continually being re-sculpted one way or another? They didn't really say any of this directly in the talk, but I felt like this was an idea worth exploring, since emphasizing the connection between pleasant and unpleasant feelings would seem to promote dispassion. Not really sure how to square this idea with the 5 aggregates.
For those who (like me) couldn't make much of this talk, here is an essay on the same topic by Ven. Akiñcano that I found helpful: pathpress.org/uppadavaya/ It seems like Ven. Akiñcano has stayed by his own interpretation (if it is indeed him in the video), so it would be interesting to see Ajahn Nyanamoli address it in a possible future talk/discussion.
Thank you for providing the link to the article on Path Press, which I also found useful. After listening to this recently I have been thinking about it a very great deal. It appears to me that Venerable Akiñcano's view (in the article) is not fundamentally opposed to that of Ajahn Nyanamoli, though there might be disagreement on the interpretation of specific terms, probably in large part due to differences in translation. For instance; I remembered listening a good while ago to an older talk from Aj. Nyanamoli on 'anicca' in which he said, (I noted after finding the talk and relistening to it): ' ''arising is manifested, ceasing is manifested, changing while standing is manifested...'' Impermanence pertains to that 'manifested' bit, it won't be found in 'arising' or 'persisting while changing' because those things are phenomena, and impermanence pertains to the nature of the phenomena. 'Arising is already persisting while changing; you just have a thing arisen - whether it's arising or ceasing, it's already a form of endurance; same goes for fading out... 'You should really distinguish between 'arising, ceasing,' etc and the word 'manifested' ...you could even say 'arising arises, ceasing arises, persisting while changing arises,' - impermanence pertains to that manifestation, that level... you don't need to watch the destruction of the thing - rather, you need it to have arisen in order to see that it is impermanent.' (The old talk on anicca can be found here: archive.org/details/hillside-hermitage-archive/20160930+-+a18hh+-+What+is+impermanence.mp3) The 'manifested bit' that Aj. Nyanamoli mentions above, is what Ven. Akiñcano advcates as an interpretation of 'uppada' (both in the article and in this talk). When Ajahn says 'you need it to have arisen (manifested) in order to see it is impermanent' - it is not really different to saying, as Ven. Akiñcano does in his article, referring to 'vaya' as 'disappearance': ''Whoever sees the nature of the disappearance of an arisen thing sees that this thing will not always be there. In other words, it is anicca.'' I think the most important thing said in this talk is that when trying to understand the suttas, one has to constantly keep in mind the reference point of 'this must free me from suffering; this should make passion impossible, etc'. With this reference point, even if due to imperfect translation or other factors we can't be sure of exactly what the Buddha SAID, we still have a chance of understanding what he MEANT.
With some conditions it seems obvious that they arise, change and cease, like a noise that arises in the stomach, which lasts 5 seconds. What you teach about impermanence is only related to the 5 khandhas ?. Thanks for the teachings 🙏
Attavada(a sense of self) is a problem because it assumes an external point of view to your experience. And that's a contradiction in terms because you can't have anything outside of your experience.
Pure gold, thank you.
I am alone with the Dhamma. There is no one here to discuss it. These are priceless to me, as are all the videos-- the gift of Dhamma. I often must listen more than once because happiness with hearing the Dhamma interferes with attending to the meaning. Replay is good! 😊
Crow T. Robot I can relate to your situation.
I will definitely be listening to this again as well.
Such a joy, such a joy!! These days have been incredible, going back and forth rewatching your videos gives me so much insight, even those I thought I had already extracted all there was to be extracted, when I come back, I come out with so much more! I remember coming across this discussion and literally not understanding a thing. Now I was able to follow through all of it and UNDERSTAND. How incredible to understand arising and ceasing in a phenomenological manner. I couldn't understand the profoundity of this when I first heard, even the other times when I rewatched this discussion, but now I can see.
This channel is so precious, I've haven't come across anything of such high quality anywhere, I would be devasted if anything happened to it. I'm sure there are others like me who are benefitting a lot from these talks.
This was a thoroughly invigorating Dhamma Talk; thanks and sadhu /|\
Thankyou Bhante for giving such a great discussion , this talks need to relisten everytime, Anumodana
🙏🏼Sadhu❣️Intense dhamma interrogation. Who was the Venerable being cross-examined? I thought he did well. It is enriching for others to whiteness someone amend their view without fierce resistance. An example for many to follow.
There are many instances in the suttapiṭaka where ariya savaka receive clarification on a specific aspect of the teaching in which they have sufficient understanding to have Right View, but are missing an overlooked connective thread that further tightens their personal dhamma basket.
🙏
Seeing experience through the Three Times versus Discerning the Knowledge of Rise and Fall.
Can this concept of impermanence, as described through the three characteristics, be extrapolated to explain why pleasant feelings cannot be assumed as our own without also assuming liability to suffering?
As Ajahn Nyanamoli has said before, we never really observe the point at which a phenomena first arises or fully ceases. Couldn't it then be said that, rather than having multiple distinct feelings that give way to one another, what we really have is a single feeling that changes while persisting?
In other words, would it be fair to say that the "pleasant" and "unpleasant" feelings we tend to see as fundamentally distinct are actually the same "piece of wet clay" continually being re-sculpted one way or another?
They didn't really say any of this directly in the talk, but I felt like this was an idea worth exploring, since emphasizing the connection between pleasant and unpleasant feelings would seem to promote dispassion.
Not really sure how to square this idea with the 5 aggregates.
More of this 🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽
On doing mindfulness correctly.
For those who (like me) couldn't make much of this talk, here is an essay on the same topic by Ven. Akiñcano that I found helpful: pathpress.org/uppadavaya/
It seems like Ven. Akiñcano has stayed by his own interpretation (if it is indeed him in the video), so it would be interesting to see Ajahn Nyanamoli address it in a possible future talk/discussion.
Thank you for providing the link to the article on Path Press, which I also found useful. After listening to this recently I have been thinking about it a very great deal. It appears to me that Venerable Akiñcano's view (in the article) is not fundamentally opposed to that of Ajahn Nyanamoli, though there might be disagreement on the interpretation of specific terms, probably in large part due to differences in translation. For instance; I remembered listening a good while ago to an older talk from Aj. Nyanamoli on 'anicca' in which he said, (I noted after finding the talk and relistening to it):
' ''arising is manifested, ceasing is manifested, changing while standing is manifested...'' Impermanence pertains to that 'manifested' bit, it won't be found in 'arising' or 'persisting while changing' because those things are phenomena, and impermanence pertains to the nature of the phenomena.
'Arising is already persisting while changing; you just have a thing arisen - whether it's arising or ceasing, it's already a form of endurance; same goes for fading out...
'You should really distinguish between 'arising, ceasing,' etc and the word 'manifested' ...you could even say 'arising arises, ceasing arises, persisting while changing arises,' - impermanence pertains to that manifestation, that level... you don't need to watch the destruction of the thing - rather, you need it to have arisen in order to see that it is impermanent.' (The old talk on anicca can be found here: archive.org/details/hillside-hermitage-archive/20160930+-+a18hh+-+What+is+impermanence.mp3)
The 'manifested bit' that Aj. Nyanamoli mentions above, is what Ven. Akiñcano advcates as an interpretation of 'uppada' (both in the article and in this talk). When Ajahn says 'you need it to have arisen (manifested) in order to see it is impermanent' - it is not really different to saying, as Ven. Akiñcano does in his article, referring to 'vaya' as 'disappearance':
''Whoever sees the nature of the disappearance of an arisen thing sees that this thing will not always be there. In other words, it is anicca.''
I think the most important thing said in this talk is that when trying to understand the suttas, one has to constantly keep in mind the reference point of 'this must free me from suffering; this should make passion impossible, etc'. With this reference point, even if due to imperfect translation or other factors we can't be sure of exactly what the Buddha SAID, we still have a chance of understanding what he MEANT.
Another explanation of Invariance Under Transformation
SPEAK YOURSELF TO SILENCE , SPEAK TO CESSATION....
Between arising or ceasing both persisting, only the direction is different
With some conditions it seems obvious that they arise, change and cease, like a noise that arises in the stomach, which lasts 5 seconds. What you teach about impermanence is only related to the 5 khandhas ?. Thanks for the teachings 🙏
38:30
WORK WEEK!!! :)