The Buddha and his Teachings, according to Suttas in the Pali Canon

[bigrooster]

The sutta from the preceding post shows that apart from relying on available translations, it might be useful, if one is keen, to look a little into the original Pāli texts. Some examples below:

This sutta was named Vitakkasaṇṭhāna Sutta.

Vitakka in this case, is translated as thought. In meditation context, vitakka is also the initial mental application - one of the jhāna factors of the 1st Jhāna.

Saṇṭhāna could mean:
- configuration, position; composition, nature, shape, form
- fuel
- a resting place, meeting place

There's a different word Santhana, which could mean appeasing, stabilising, or satisfaction.

Out of the translations put up on SuttaCentral, different translated sutta titles were used. I suspected some of the translators read/refer to Santhana instead of Saṇṭhāna.

Bhikkhu Bodhi : The Removal of Distracting Thoughts
Suddhāso Bhikkhu : The Stabilisation of Thoughts
I.B. Horner : The Forms of Thoughts
Bhikkhu Sujato : How to Stop Thinking

Maybe that was why some people think that meditating is to stop thinking.

If I were to give a title worth 2 cents, I would have used "The Shaping of Thoughts". Because towards the end of the sutta, the Buddha says that the bhikkhu who managed to transcend the distracting unwholesome thoughts "is then called a master of the courses of thought. He will think whatever thought he wishes to think and he will not think any thought that he does not wish to think. He has severed craving, flung off the fetters, and with the complete penetration of conceit he has made an end of suffering.”

Online reference: MN 20 - Vitakkasaṇṭhāna Sutta, Bhikkhu Bodhi translation

 

[bigrooster]

Iti 49 - Diṭṭhigata Sutta [Held by (Wrong) View]

Excerpt:
"This was said by the Lord…
“Bhikkhus, held by two kinds of views, some devas and human beings hold back and some overreach; only those with vision see."

“And how, bhikkhus, do some hold back? Devas and humans enjoy being, delight in being, are satisfied with being. When Dhamma is taught to them for the cessation of being, their minds do not enter into it or acquire confidence in it or settle upon it or become resolved upon it. Thus, bhikkhus, do some hold back."

“How, bhikkhus, do some overreach? Now some are troubled, ashamed, and disgusted by this very same being and they rejoice in (the idea of) non-being, asserting: ‘In as much as this self, good sirs, when the body perishes at death, is annihilated and destroyed and does not exist after death—this is peaceful, this is excellent, this is reality!’ Thus, bhikkhus, do some overreach."

“How, bhikkhus, do those with vision see? Herein a bhikkhu sees what has come to be as having come to be. Having seen it thus, he practises the course for turning away, for dispassion, for the cessation of what has come to be. Thus, bhikkhus, do those with vision see.”"

Online reference: Iti 49 - Diṭṭhigata Sutta, John D. Ireland translation

Note:
Sharing this, taken from the Itivuttaka, which highlights the 2 wrong views of eternalism and nihilism. The first type is pretty prevalent among us - we want to continue to enjoy sensual pleasures, acted out of (ignorant) volition to generate/extend clinging to the 5 aggregates. The Dhamma is (still) available now for them to explore and follow up but they are not interested.
Second type was also increasingly seen in recent threads on forum: they said, life is meaningless, everything is fixed and can't be changed, die already end of story.

 

[Elnoxv]

Second type was also increasingly seen in recent threads on forum: they said, life is meaningless, everything is fixed and can't be changed, die already end of story.

Imho, having a write up that directly address the second type of question would be great to clear the confusion around this topic.

 

[bigrooster]

Imho, having a write up that directly address the second type of question would be great to clear the confusion around this topic.

True. But imho, the many people having this type of thinking and approach may not take in ideas with even a tinge of Dhamma-flavour; e.g. conditioning, cause and effect may not be readily acceptable by them. Need many modern mundane examples to be able to work, maybe.

 

[Elnoxv]

True. But imho, the many people having this type of thinking and approach may not take in ideas with even a tinge of Dhamma-flavour; e.g. conditioning, cause and effect may not be readily acceptable by them. Need many modern mundane examples to be able to work, maybe.

Yah, I guess it can’t be helped since these topics: conditioning and cause and effect can be quite challenging to comprehend and to prove.

Perhaps, like what you have mentioned. Some modern mundane examples may work.

Or maybe could start with some credible resources such as “Dr. ian stevenson reincarnation cases” from university of Virginia.

Generally, I think people tend to believe in Science so with science as a support, people will be more readily accept the idea of cause and effect and reincarnation.

or perhaps, some logical reasoning that challenges their existing beliefs.

 

[bigrooster]

Yah, I guess it can’t be helped since these topics: conditioning and cause and effect can be quite challenging to comprehend and to prove.

Perhaps, like what you have mentioned. Some modern mundane examples may work.

Or maybe could start with some credible resources such as “Dr. ian stevenson reincarnation cases” from university of Virginia.

Generally, I think people tend to believe in Science so with science as a support, people will be more readily accept the idea of cause and effect and reincarnation.

or perhaps, some logical reasoning that challenges their existing beliefs.

Yes, logical reasoning is a good way. Depending on the audience, before we can even get to the Right View proper (e.g. non-self), gradual approach would probably have to be made, be it using science, pseudo-science, or psychology. My 2 cents.

On this forum, I sometime chip in with my piece without making it sounding too 'spiritual', if I think it's applicable. I believe you contributed on several occasions in such similar threads.

 

[Ironside]

The nature of buddhism is likely to be the most scientific of all religion. As in you can test the many "hypothesis". For example, wholesome behaviours reduce suffering. For example, the doctrine of the four noble truths, i.e. the problem, the cause of the problem, the problem can be solved, the way to solve the problem. It requires one to listen attentively to the detailed instructions, understand it, practice it and review it. So, it is not a layback system but one that need some determination and hard work to make progress.

 

[bigrooster]

The nature of buddhism is likely to be the most scientific of all religion. As in you can test the many "hypothesis". For example, wholesome behaviours reduce suffering. For example, the doctrine of the four noble truths, i.e. the problem, the cause of the problem, the problem can be solved, the way to solve the problem. It requires one to listen attentively to the detailed instructions, understand it, practice it and review it. So, it is not a layback system but one that need some determination and hard work to make progress.

Certainly. For those who have the interest to find out more, and for those who took the first steps to work on it.

But people in general see and talk about what is immediately in front of them. The usual example of "I see bad people having it easy, good people die young". The 'cause and effect' is not immediately apparent to them; they do not see that when people habitually commit unwholesome actions their mental states, their Saṅkhāras were unwholesome and continue to reinforce and re-condition themselves, pending the kammic consequences to materialise under the right conditions.

 

[Ironside]

Certainly. For those who have the interest to find out more, and for those who took the first steps to work on it.

But people in general see and talk about what is immediately in front of them. The usual example of "I see bad people having it easy, good people die young". The 'cause and effect' is not immediately apparent to them; they do not see that when people habitually commit unwholesome actions their mental states, their Saṅkhāras were unwholesome and continue to reinforce and re-condition themselves, pending the kammic consequences to materialise under the right conditions.

I think focus more on myself to test the "hypothesis" is a good idea. No way we can control others.

 

[bigrooster]

I think focus more on myself to test the "hypothesis" is a good idea. No way we can control others.

True. We can offer to share what we know, experienced, or found out; whether they take in or not, we cannot control.

If no one is keen, then we "wander alone like a rhinoceros".

Also, it's necessary to "straighten our own views" first, or "put on oxygen mask first before helping others".

 

[Ironside]

Very few people I met express Buddhism as methods to condition the mind properly, in other words very psychology-inclined. Many focus too much on the superstitious aspects.

 

[AUTUMN&WINTER]

Very few people I met express Buddhism as methods to condition the mind properly, in other words very psychology-inclined. Many focus too much on the superstitious aspects.

Many Buddhists meditate. Meditation is not superstitious, it's psychology inclined. Anyway, the ultimate aim of Buddhism is liberation from rebirth in 6 realms. One is spiritual myopia if one thinks that Buddhism is a way of life or training the mind and overlooks the big matter of life and death.

 

[mrBooBoo]

Very few people I met express Buddhism as methods to condition the mind properly, in other words very psychology-inclined. Many focus too much on the superstitious aspects.

probably because it is hard to understand the goal of meditation, whereas say chanting heart sutra has always been part of the culture.

but I do think once you experience anatta, you get the point.


Read HWZ Forum Rules!

 

[forests_gump]

In the distance past, S'pore secondary school education includes religious study. I would how accurate is the Buddhism study during then.

 

[bigrooster]

In the distance past, S'pore secondary school education includes religious study. I would how accurate is the Buddhism study during then.

RK - Religious Knowledge. I was the first batch of students who did this subject.

The teachers from our schools were sent for some "crash course" and then came back to teach us. The syllabus and content was an amalgamation of the two main traditions here (Theravada and Mahayana), though only the history and main teachings were covered. There were English and Chinese classes/subjects (Buddhist Studies/佛学). I took the English one; they used Sanskrit instead of Pali for the names and technical terms.

 

[thekh21]

Asking :been abt awareness,does this correlate or gel with sixth sense in daily life

 

[bigrooster]

Asking :been abt awareness,does this correlate or gel with sixth sense in daily life

Your "sixth sense", are you referring to the "gut feel" of something or some event before it happens?

In the discourses, there are the 5 senses + the mind (the 6th sense).

As briefly depicted here, the awareness or cognition in Buddhism refers to the consciousness. Consciousness of what?

• There are the 6 sense bases: eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind.
• There are the 6 sense objects: forms, sounds, odours, tastes, tactile objects, mental phenomena.
• When the 6 sense bases each met their respective sense objects, the corresponding consciousness comes into play: eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose consciousness, tongue consciousness, body consciousness, mind consciousness.
• The sense impingement resulting from the meeting of the 3 categories mentioned above are: eye-contact, ear-contact, nose-contact, tongue-contact, body-contact, mind-contact.

So, in the case of the mind, when an idea/opinion/scenario comes into your mind - these are called mind objects/mental phenomena. When this happens, mind consciousness comes in, and you are aware because of the contact of the mind-mind objects-mind consciousness.

In practice, the Buddha advised us not to hold on to forms, sounds, odours, tastes, tactile objects, mental phenomena. For mental objects, it is just another form of formations/fabrications.

 

[forests_gump]

RK - Religious Knowledge. I was the first batch of students who did this subject.

The teachers from our schools were sent for some "crash course" and then came back to teach us. The syllabus and content was an amalgamation of the two main traditions here (Theravada and Mahayana), though only the history and main teachings were covered. There were English and Chinese classes/subjects (Buddhist Studies/佛学). I took the English one; they used Sanskrit instead of Pali for the names and technical terms.

Nice, I wonder if anywhere can still get this RK textbook (or softcopy), as it is written from a easy to understand content.

 

[thekh21]

Your "sixth sense", are you referring to the "gut feel" of something or some event before it happens?

In the discourses, there are the 5 senses + the mind (the 6th sense).

As briefly depicted here, the awareness or cognition in Buddhism refers to the consciousness. Consciousness of what?

• There are the 6 sense bases: eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind.
• There are the 6 sense objects: forms, sounds, odours, tastes, tactile objects, mental phenomena.
• When the 6 sense bases each met their respective sense objects, the corresponding consciousness comes into play: eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose consciousness, tongue consciousness, body consciousness, mind consciousness.
• The sense impingement resulting from the meeting of the 3 categories mentioned above are: eye-contact, ear-contact, nose-contact, tongue-contact, body-contact, mind-contact.

So, in the case of the mind, when an idea/opinion/scenario comes into your mind - these are called mind objects/mental phenomena. When this happens, mind consciousness comes in, and you are aware because of the contact of the mind-mind objects-mind consciousness.

In practice, the Buddha advised us not to hold on to forms, sounds, odours, tastes, tactile objects, mental phenomena. For mental objects, it is just another form of formations/fabrications.

Thanks , at times even science cant fathom

 

[bigrooster]

Nice, I wonder if anywhere can still get this RK textbook (or softcopy), as it is written from a easy to understand content.

I don't think softcopy is available. Online once in a blue moon got people sell - this one is considered "antic" status liao.

https://www.carousell.sg/p/buddhist-studies-book-1166185784/