Question about Tīkā (subcommentaries)

General Theravada topics
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
31

yes indeed.

1 Like
32

Those Dhamma-devotee monks were sotapanna according to the Commentary (as were the jhana monks)…

No one is saying that reading alone - as in reading suttas the way a scholar or dilettante studies is the way.
However reading/listening to Dhamma, if there is wise attention, can lead directly to insight. That is why pariyatti is a needed condition for pattipati.

So how much pariyatti do we need?

The commentary to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, the
Abhidhammattha
Vibhavani gives
this answer:

“There are people who like short explanations, there
are people who
like explanations of medium length, and there are
people who like
detailed explanations. Those among the different
groups who are slow in
understanding as regards mentality can understand
realities as
explained by way of five khandhas, because mentality
is classified by
way of four khandhas, thus, in a more extensive way.
Those who are slow
in understanding as regards physical phenomena (rupa)
can understand
realities as explained by way of ayatanas. The five
senses and the
five sense objects are ten kinds of rupa which are
ayatanas. As to
dhammayatana this comprises both nama and rupa. Thus
in this
classification rupa has been explained more
extensively. Those who are
slow in understanding as to both nama and rupa can
understand realities
as explained by way of elements, dhatus, because in
this
classification both nama and rupa have been explained
in detail.”

1 Like
33

Wasn’t these wrong views come as a result of recollection of past lives rather than vipassana practice. There is a sutta that says if a hen incubate her eggs, they will hatch whether the hen hope for the eggs to hatch or not. If the right path is followed, the right result will follow.

Someone who investigate nama-rupa will be able to see impermanence, regardless of whether he/she had learned it before or not. I think this is how panna works. That is also how a pacceka buddha come to be. Of course having knowledge of the concept of impermanence before will be even better. But the key here is the method of practice, not the theoretical aspect.

1 Like
34

Ven. Ledi in one of his dipani wrote that nowadays there are no type of person that can achieve insight [enlightment] by learning. Of course this depends on whether one believe what Ven. Ledi wrote or not.

So how much pariyatti do we need?

The commentary to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, the
Abhidhammattha
Vibhavani gives
this answer:

This can be seen in the various lengths of sutta in the tipitaka. Some are short and some are very long. But if we take what Ven. Ledi wrote above, what people nowadays need is elaborate practice instructions like those written in the Visuddhi Magga. Still there are 7 visuddhis and the knowledge of how to practice ditthi visuddhi and so on is not required unless one has attained citta-visuddhi.

1 Like
35

I am not sure if you read my earlier reply: “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.”
What I meant is that while considering Dhamma there can be some level of understanding- even direct insight- into realities. For example while reading this post there is cakhhu-vinnana , and visble object, and there is vedana, and many other elements.

Can they be known directly right now? My suggestion is that they can be.

36

I think I have missed it. I do agree from personal experience that knowing abhidhamma help me know better of the mental formations that arise. Especially the best explanation abhidhamma give is to deterministically show what constitute an akusala and kusala kamma. Akusala kamma is caused by akusala-citta, kusala kamma is caused by kusala-citta. Those who have not learn abhidhamma just take an action as a whole, not recognizing that there a lot of type of consciousness in a single action.

The thing that I would argue is that seeing mental formations without the power of upacara samadhi/jhana vs with the power of upacara samadhi/jhana is like seeing with a magnifying glass vs microscope. The observation power given by concentration is much larger which is required for panna to develop. Even the visuddhi magga uses a lot of abhidhamma in its section of ditthi-visuddhi upwards, but it only taught so after one has developed upacara samadhi or jhana.

37

Is ledi sayadaw referring to the well known exposition in the Puggalapaññatti ?( 41-2; p.58 of the translation by Bimala Law
> Designation of Human Types

What sort of person is quick in acquiring ?
The person who comprehends the doctrine at the time of
its pronouncement is said to be quick in acquiring.

What sort of person learns by exposition ?
The person to whom comprehension of the doctrine comes
when the meaning of what is briefly uttered is analysed
in detail.

What sort of person is one who may be led ?
The person to whom comprehension of the doctrine
comes by recitation, questioning, and earnest attention and by
serving, cultivating and waiting upon lovely friends is one
who may be led,.

What sort of person is one with whom the word is the chief
thing ?
The person to whom comprehension of doctrine would
not come in this life, however much he may hear and say and
bear in mind or recite, is said to be one with whom the word
is the chief thing.

38

So this is really another topic. I wrote about the path of the dry insight worker here:

you might like to comment on that thread :slight_smile:

39

It seems so

After the passing of the first thousand years (of the present Buddha Sasana), which constituted the times of the patisambhidha-patta arahat (arahat possessing analytical knowledge), the period of the present Buddha Sasana comprises the times of the neyya and padaparama classes of individuals alone. At the present day, only these two classes of individuals remain. [source]