I read somewhere in this thread that awakening can occur via the conventional or ultimate, but I can’t find it. Does anyone have any references which discuss this?
From Nyanatiloka Buddhist Dictionary[quote=“RobertK, post:9, topic:1732”]
Paramattha (-sacca, -vacana, -desanā)
‘truth (or term, exposition) that is true in the highest (or
ultimate) sense’, as contrasted with the ‘conventional truth’
(vohāra-sacca), which is also called ‘commonly accepted truth’
(sammuti-sacca; in Skr: samvrti-satya).
The Buddha, in explaining his doctrine, sometimes used conventional
language and sometimes the philosophical mode of expression which is
in accordance whith undeluded insight into reality. In that ultimate
sense, existence is a mere process of physical and mental phenomena
within which, or beyond which, no real ego-entity nor any abiding
substance can ever be found. Thus, whenever the suttas speak of man,
woman or person, or of the rebirth of a being, this must not be taken
as being valid in the ultimate sense, but as a mere conventional mode
of speech (vohāra-vacana).
…
It should be noted, however, that also statements of the Buddha
couched in conventional language, are called ‘truth’ (vohāra-sacca),
being correct on their own level, which does not contradict the fact
that such statements ultimately refer to impermanent and impersonal
processes.
[/quote]
2 Likes
Thanks Robert. I had in mind the idea that awakening can occur without directly experiencing the sabhava-dhammas, and so the supramundane can be achieved based on conventional experience. I read this somewhere in the forum but now can’t find it.
I don’t think that is possible.
Unless you mean the fact that it is actually the nimitta of the realities that is known?
Yes, there was such a discussion on this forum, but I don’t believe that awakening can occur without penetrating ultimate reality.
If one hasn’t penetrated ultimate reality, they may still believe concepts such as man, woman, etc really exist when, in reality, there are only namas and rupas.
1 Like
Perhaps I’m remembering wrong, but I think it was in relation to Ledi Sayadaw saying normal people, as in not Buddhas, can’t observe the swiftness of the mind. I’ll have another look around.
Ah here it is: Ledi Sayadaw’s note on momentariness - #8 by bksubhuti
1 Like
Improper use of terms
Impermanence etc is regarding, paramattha dhammas. As in
aniccaññeva, bhikkhave, bhikkhu vedanaṃ aniccanti passati. sāssa hoti sammādiṭṭhi. sammā passaṃ nibbindati…
Here is how commentary to the patisambidha Magga referred to udayabbayañāṇa
udayabbayānupassanāya suparidiṭṭhaudayabbayassa suparicchinnesu saṅkhāresu lahuṃ lahuṃ upaṭṭhahantesu ñāṇe…
But some people are sharper than others.