Question about Tīkā (subcommentaries)

General Theravada topics
11

Yes… I believe this too. I think this is where we get subjective to “accepting” the subcommentaries.

On the other hand… with vinaya… often a derogatory comment is… this sub sub sub commentary says, “yadayada”. The aim is to belittle an ancient commentary.

Usually a Western monk from a Thai tradition will say this because he does not want to follow the rules and encourage others to do the same, whilst at the same time recommending the very recent Thai Vinaya Mukha, which allows eating chocolate, cheese, and bottled juice as seven day medicines.

1 Like
12

What is even better than all the sutta, atthakattha, or tika is what Ven. Ledi Sayadaw call bhavana-maya panna (knowledge that come from practice). I don’t know if this is a term of the commentary or Ven. Ledi’s own terms. Surprisingly the amount of theory required to start practicing Buddhism is not that much. Reading too many text also has its danger where one’s time can be used too much thinking about theories. Sometimes less is better.

I think it sounds more cool if people say, based on my experience … rather than based on this text … Which is why Ven. Ledi’s text which often does not cite the reference could be a plus, because it sounds that the Venerable speak from experience. Of course we also need to reflect whether it is in accordance with the basic Buddhist principles or not.

13

I agree that reading more doesn’t mean wiser. But to understand the teaching is the core of practice.

But it depends on our intelligence, parami, and willingness to learn too.

2 Likes
14

I would argue that reading the text does not give (much) understanding. Reading the text creates view and belief, “I think the meaning of this text is this…” and so on. Whether the belief is true or not must be proved in practice, which then results in understanding.

For example no matter how much I read about anicca it is still a preconception rather than understanding.

More text, more belief. And we tend to filter information that does not support our beliefs. Thus the belief become more stronger. Strong belief can sometimes become an obstacle to true understanding, if the reality does not conform to our belief.

15

I prefer being “Bahussuta”. And one of the five strengths of Sotapanna is “Suta” too.

But most importantly, study the scriptures with care and practice it in real life situation wherever applicable.

1 Like
16

If one is a monk, one has the responsibility to learn the vinaya. If one breaks the rules even without knowing there was a rule that was broken, there can be extreme consequence such as the heavy rules. But the smaller rules can also be a blockage to attainments.

Then why ordain?
Because monk life is set up to give one plenty of time for practice. It is a net gain.

Much of the abhidhammatthasaṅgaha, which is a ṭīkā, would need to be memorized along the way as one meditates and progresses. It does not take long if one is personally working with those dhammas in meditation. The abhidhammatthasaṅgaha, has many of the core terms all nicely packed into one small book. That is why much of it needs to be memorized.

I don’t know anyone who has studied the whole of the abhidhammapiṭaka who would criticize the abhidhammatthasaṅgaha. When we get praise like that, then it is definitely a worthy ṭīkā for acceptance.

2 Likes
17

Now this is interesting thing. There are people who attain enlightment without ever knowing abhidhamma. Do they know the categorization of nama-rupa in abhidhamma? I assume so, when they investigate the nama-rupa, the knowledge of this is consciousness, this is perception, etc. this is their arising, this is their ceasing came to them by itself, that is by practice.

I think my point is that, one could just read as much as one can practice. We know that the amount of sutta, with atthakatha, with tika, is enormous. Why spend time reading all that when we can read a short text on how to meditate, and then spend time actually meditating. Maybe increase our textual knowledge along the way as our experience increase.

If I am going to diet do I have to read all the books there is about diet and take a doctorate in nutrition? Of course not. I can just pick one book, try it, and if it does not work, find another method. Of course if one want to read all the books available about diet and take a doctorate in nutrition it is their choice, but it is simply unnecessary.

1 Like
18

It can be that someone thinks they understand in practice nama-rupa, think they are perceiving consciousness, but their perception is tainted by wrong view.

This can also happen even with the one who is knowledgeable in Abhidhamma but the whole thrust of the Abhidhamma is to break down the self - and to varying degree the one who studies it rightly will at least dampen the coarse views of self.

When one is considering Abhidhamma rightly it should be that even while reading the words they see that it is very real in daily life- there is seeing (cakkhu vinnana) for instance.

1 Like
19

Abhidhamma is indeed very helpful in classifying mental formations.

There are a lot of account of people attaining enlightment in the sutta pitaka but I think none has ever mentioned 89 type of cittas or cetasikas.

Abhidhamma might be a system of naming and classification added later, just like species latin names. Before there is a latin name, does not mean that the spesies in unknown, there is just no standard name and different people might use different name for it.

So while abhidhamma is helpful it might not be the only way. Analysis of nama-rupa can be done directly on the realities. When done correctly after jhana or upacara samadhi there should not be wrong views because it is supressed by samatha.

20

This is a common wrong perception that one can be enlightened without being knowing Abhidhamma concept such as Khandhas, Ayatanas, Dhatu, Pannatti, Saccas, Indriyas etc.

Even the Bhikkhu Cula-Panthaka, who can even penetrate a single Gatha, when he gained Enlightenment through mind investigation and meditation (which is the realm of Abhidhamma), he was able to demonstrate Dhamma teachings in many ways.

It can be said that without fully penetrating Abhidhamma to the extent of a Sammasambuddha, one can be enlightened as Savaka only. But this Savaka will too, understand Abhidhamma greatly sufficient to gain Enlightenment. But to the Teacher and General of Dhamma, the Abhidhamma was so clear and penetrated the teachings in all aspects.

Abhidhamma’s status shouldn’t be just “helpful”, but it is “necessary” to gain Enlightenment. Yes, we can start off from various method: Sutta, Bhavana, Sila, etc., but in the process of it, one will encounter Abhidhamma inevitably, especially when discerning the truth of Pancakhandha in meditation.

But we layfollowers (we are quite slacky) are not monks, so we will begin the practice thorough basics such as Dana, Sila, and Bhavana. But once we are ready to strive full 100% for gaining Enlightenment, that will be the time we need both Suttanta Pitaka & Abhidhamma Pitaka altogether.

1 Like
21

People can differentiate colors without knowing its names, just like people can differentiate type of realities without knowing its abhidhamma classification beforehand.

22

And this is where things went wrong.

Take a look on SJWs.

23

I think an issue that is underestimated is how deep the idea of self runs.

So among meditators we often hear about observing realities without much understanding that sati is just as conditioned and uncontrollable as any other factor. Thus the ‘observation’ may be heavily tainted…

2 Likes
24

This is not a problem specific to abhidhamma, right? A lot of sutta taught the analysis of nama-rupa into the 5 khandhas and the 6 senses. Even in abhidhamma, there might be people trying to classify nibanna as some kind of citta.

So among meditators we often hear about observing realities without much understanding that sati is just as conditioned and uncontrollable as any other factor.

This pose another question of whether bare mindfulness is classical theravada, since if take visuddhi magga as reference it does not support the bare mindfulness approach. And my proposition before is that by the power of concentration in upacara-samadhi or jhana, kilesa can be temporarily supressed thus no wrong view will form, at least while in the state and just after samadhi. While atta-ditthi is latent, when it come into surface it most likely will be associated with akusala-citta, I think. After upacara-samadhi or jhana, the citta should be kusala-citta.

I am not against abhidhamma or anything, my point is simply that, if it is useful and practical, then use it. There is not need to read all the Buddhist texts, since it is enormous.

25

It is clear that the classical position regarding Study and Practice is that
“We are advised to do both, by the Blessed One.”

And Maha Cunda Sutta says that it is not good to belittle each one of them.

Ven. Maha Cunda said, "Friends, there is the case where Dhamma-devotee monks (Those devoted to memorizing and analyzing the Dhamma.) disparage jhana monks, saying, ‘These people are absorbed and besorbed in jhana, saying, “We are absorbed, we are absorbed.” But why, indeed, are they absorbed? For what purpose are they absorbed? How are they absorbed?’ In that, the Dhamma-devotee monks do not shine brightly, and the jhana monks do not shine brightly. That is not practicing for the welfare of the masses, for the happiness of the masses, for the good of the masses, nor for the welfare & happiness of human & divine beings.

"Then there is the case where jhana monks disparage Dhamma-devotee monks, saying, ‘These people say, "We are Dhamma-devotees, we are Dhamma-devotees,’ but they are excitable, boisterous, unsteady, mouthy, loose in their talk, muddled in their mindfulness, unalert, unconcentrated, their minds wandering, their senses uncontrolled. Why, indeed, are they Dhamma devotees? For what purpose are they Dhamma devotees? How are they Dhamma devotees?’ In that, the jhana monks do not shine brightly, and the Dhamma-devotee monks do not shine brightly. That is not practicing for the welfare of the masses, for the happiness of the masses, for the good of the masses, nor for the welfare & happiness of human & divine beings.

"Then there is the case where Dhamma-devotee monks praise only Dhamma-devotee monks, and not jhana monks. In that, the Dhamma-devotee monks do not shine brightly, and the jhana monks do not shine brightly. That is not practicing for the welfare of the masses, for the happiness of the masses, for the good of the masses, nor for the welfare & happiness of human & divine beings.

"Then there is the case where jhana monks praise only jhana monks, and not Dhamma-devotee monks. In that, the jhana monks do not shine brightly, and the Dhamma-devotee monks do not shine brightly. That is not practicing for the welfare of the masses, for the happiness of the masses, for the good of the masses, nor for the welfare & happiness of human & divine beings.

"Thus, friends, you should train yourselves: ‘Being Dhamma-devotee monks, we will speak in praise of jhana monks.’ That’s how you should train yourselves. Why is that? Because these are amazing people, hard to find in the world, i.e., those who dwell touching the deathless element with the body.

“And thus, friends, you should train yourselves: ‘Being jhana monks, we will speak in praise of Dhamma-devotee monks.’ That’s how you should train yourselves. Why is that? Because these are amazing people, hard to find in the world, i.e., those who penetrate with discernment statements of deep meaning.”

26

This begets the question of whether Dhamma can be understood by reading it. Just like we can never understood driving a car by reading book about it, only by actually doing it, it is my opinion that true understanding can never come from reading, only beliefs and opinions come from reading, that’s why different people have different opinion. Only via actual observation of the realities that true understanding can be gained.

27

It should be noted that just as people make Bodhisatta vows and attain saṅkhārupekkhāñāṇa but do not go further than that (and a real Bodhisatta would go that far if possible). In the same way, there are those who strive to become paccekabuddhā for two asaṅkhyeyyāni or chief disciples of the Buddha such as sāriputta and mahāmoggallāna for one asaṅkhyeyya. It takes a lot of time to cook a chief disciple. The same could be said for anyone who wants to be present during the time of a Buddha let alone attain enlightenment. We can see that beings have been “following” through saṃsāra with the dhpA and DhpA stories when the persons are revealed at the end of the stories. In this way, they are able to know everything with one line from a Buddha, because of previous past life training and aspirations. That is why we have paṭisambhidappattā ariyasāvakā. They are those who aspired to do so in the past.

Dve asaṅkhyeyyāni, kappasatasahassañca pāramiyo pūretvā paccekabuddhā uppajjanti, ekaṃ asaṅkhyeyyaṃ, kappasatasahassañca pāramiyo pūretvā sāriputtamoggallānādayo mahāsāvakā uppajjanti,

28

A lot of previous life training I have read is jhana attainment. It is possible that these people was reborn in the brahma realm before and then be reborn in the human world, thus have less kilesa. Maybe there are a lot of people that can attain direct enlightment in the time of the Buddha because there are a lot of beings that aspire to be reborn in the time of a Buddha before just like there might be a lot of beings in the present time that aspire to be reborn in the time of Metteya Buddha. So when they collect paramis and be reborn at the time of Metteya Buddha they can gain enlightment directly without elaborate practice.

I am still convinced that knowledge that come from practice (bhavanamaya-panna) is better than knowledge that come via reading (suttamaya-panna). Just like there is bhavana-saddha (unbending faith that come from self-realization) vs pakati-saddha (faith that come from reading/hearding). Of course suttamaya-panna is a prerequisite for bhavanamaya-panna, just like bhavanamaya-panna is a prerequisite for nibanna, but they are just tools and not the end goal of itself. Less tool = less cost. Of course more tools can be better if one can afford it.

29

“Less tool - less cost.”

This is really demeaning learned Theras and Theris in the past such as Sariputta, Dhammadinna, Sanghamitta, Buddhaghosa, etc. And I wouldn’t see “less tool” is a better way to attain the final goal. If that is so, there should be only four strengths of Sotapanna instead of five.

30

Well of course while in jhana there can be no akusala arising. However consider the Brahmajala sutta where many of the wrong views enumerated are based on jhanas.
Even Devadatta had mastery of jhana.

Again during dana or any other kusala kammatha patha there is no wrong view arising at the same moments - yet as you mention the wrong view is still latent. Thus it can/will arise at any opportunity

Fortunately there can be understanding of akusala as just an element; as part of satipatthana.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/soma/wayof.html#discourse
3. THE CONTEMPLATION OF CONSCIOUSNESS
"And how, O bhikkhus, does a bhikkhu live contemplating consciousness in consciousness?

"Here, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu understands the consciousness with lust, as with lust; the consciousness without lust, as without lust; the consciousness with hate, as with hate; the consciousness without hate, as without hate;

1 Like