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

[bigrooster]

AN Book 10:61(1) Pg 1415
Associating with good persons > hear good dhamma > faith > careful attention > mindfulness and clear comprehension > restraint of sense facilities > three kinds of good conducts > four establishments of mindfulness > seven factors of enlightenment > True knowledge and liberation

AN 10.61 - Avijjā Sutta (Discourse on Ignorance)

Excerpt:
“I say, bhikkhus, that
(1) Ignorance has a nutriment; it is not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for ignorance? It should be said: The five hindrances. 

(2) The five hindrances, too, I say, have a nutriment; they are not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for the five hindrances? It should be said: The three kinds of misconduct.

(3) The three kinds of misconduct, too, I say, have a nutriment; they are not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for the three kinds of misconduct? It should be said: Non-restraint of the sense faculties.
(4) Non-restraint of the sense faculties, too, I say, has a nutriment; it is not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for non-restraint of the sense faculties? It should be said: Lack of mindfulness and clear comprehension. 

(5) Lack of mindfulness and clear comprehension, too, I say, has a nutriment; it is not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for lack of mindfulness and clear comprehension? It should be said: Careless attention. 

(6) Careless attention, too, I say, has a nutriment; it is not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for careless attention? It should be said: Lack of faith.

(7) Lack of faith, too, I say, has a nutriment; it is not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for lack of faith? It should be said: Not hearing the good Dhamma.

(8) Not hearing the good Dhamma, too, I say, has a nutriment; it is not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for not hearing the good Dhamma? It should be said:

(9) Not associating with good persons.



I say, bhikkhus, that
(1) True knowledge and liberation have a nutriment; they are not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for true knowledge and liberation? It should be said:
(2) The seven factors of enlightenment. The seven factors of enlightenment, too, I say, have a nutriment; they are not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for the seven factors of enlightenment? It should be said:

(3) The four establishments of mindfulness. The four establishments of mindfulness, too, I say, have a nutriment; they are not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for the four establishments of mindfulness? It should be said:

(4) The three kinds of good conduct. The three kinds of good conduct, too, I say, have a nutriment; they are not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for the three kinds of good conduct? It should be said:
(5) Restraint of the sense faculties. Restraint of the sense faculties, too, I say, has a nutriment; it is not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for restraint of the sense faculties? It should be said:

(6) Mindfulness and clear comprehension. Mindfulness and clear comprehension, too, I say, have a nutriment; they are not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for mindfulness and clear comprehension? It should be said:

(7) Careful attention. Careful attention, too, I say, has a nutriment; it is not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for careful attention? It should be said:

(8) Faith. Faith, too, I say, has a nutriment; it is not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for faith? It should be said:

(9) Hearing the good Dhamma. Hearing the good Dhamma, too, I say, has a nutriment; it is not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for hearing the good Dhamma? It should be said: 

(10) Associating with good persons."

Source:
AN 10.61 - Avijjā Sutta, Bhikkhu Bodhi translation

 

[nottibeans]

I refer to SN 14:9(9). The starting of the chain, "elements". What exactly does element in this case means?

In AN book 6:111(5), the word, element is also used. What does it means in this case?

Are the meaning of the two cases the same?

Copied the Pali definition from the sutta commentary and ask AI to interprete.

nissattaṭṭhasuññataṭṭhasaṅkhātena sabhāvaṭṭhena dhātūti laddhanāmānaṃ dhammānaṃ nānāsabhāvo dhātunānattaṃ.

Ah, this is a Pali commentary explaining the term "dhātu" (element). Let me break it down:

The compound "nissattaṭṭha-suññataṭṭha-saṅkhātena sabhāvaṭṭhena" describes dhātu as:
- nissatta: non-being/no-self
- suññata: emptiness
- sabhāva: intrinsic nature

So dhātu here refers to phenomena (dhamma) that:
1. Have no permanent self/essence
2. Are empty of inherent existence
3. Yet have their own characteristic nature or quality

"Dhātunānattaṃ" means "diversity of elements" - indicating different types or categories of these fundamental phenomena.

This definition aligns with the Abhidhamma perspective where dhātu refers to irreducible, fundamental qualities that make up experience, while still being empty of any permanent self.

However, I recommend verifying this interpretation with authoritative sources or a qualified teacher, as understanding these technical Pali terms requires careful study.

(Above is AI's answer.)


The Pali definition only describes dhātu as absence of being/person, emptiness and having individual intrinsic essence.

AI explanation of emptiness not so correct. Don't know what is meant by empty of inherent existence. I think AI copied this vague meaning from the internet.

Emptiness is usually related to non-self. One meaning of non-self is there is no dictating self that lords over all these elements. We don't have any control over these elements. These elements have their own intrinsic essence. They have their own individual characteristics, function & proximate cause. When the causes arise, they arise. We cannot stop them from arising or perishing. There is no one, no creator or overlord who reigns over them. When there is eye-element(eye sensitivity), color element, light, contact and attention, eye-consciousness will surely arise. No one can stop it.

Dhātu(element) is related to the higher dhamma (Abhidhamma). The body/person is broken down into elements or ultimate realities to show there is no being/person actually in the ultimate sense. It is just a continuity of nāma-rūpa (ultimate mental & material realities or elements causally arising & perishing). Each element perform its own function and then perishes. We deluded think that they are me(I), mine or my self/soul.

 

[nottibeans]

Abhidhamma's definition of dhātu.

avisesena pana vidahati, dhīyate, vidhānaṃ, vidhīyate etāya, ettha vā dhīyatīti dhātu. lokiyā hi dhātuyo kāraṇabhāvena vavatthitā hutvā suvaṇṇarajatādidhātuyo viya suvaṇṇarajatādiṃ anekappakāraṃ saṃsāradukkhaṃ vidahanti, bhārahārehi ca bhāro viya sattehi dhīyante dhārīyanteti attho. dukkhavidhānamattameva cetā avasavattanato. etāhi ca karaṇabhūtāhi saṃsāradukkhaṃ sattehi anuvidhīyati, tathāvihitañcetaṃ etāsveva dhīyati ṭhapīyatīti attho. iti cakkhādīsu ekeko dhammo yathāsambhavaṃ vidahati dhīyatetiādiatthavasena dhātūti vuccati.

This is an important etymological explanation of the term "dhātu" (element). Let me break down the key points:

The text explains dhātu in several ways:
1. vidahati - it arranges/disposes
2. dhīyate - it is borne/carried
3. vidhānaṃ - arrangement
4. vidhīyate - is arranged
5. dhīyati - is placed/established

The worldly elements (lokiyā dhātuyo) are compared to mineral elements like gold and silver (suvaṇṇarajatādi). Just as these minerals exist as causes for various things, the dhātus:
- Arrange various kinds of saṃsāric suffering
- Are carried by beings like a burden (bhāra)
- Function as instruments of suffering due to being beyond control (avasavattana)

The text concludes that each element (like eye, etc.) is called dhātu because it:
- Arranges (vidahati)
- Is borne (dhīyate)
- Serves as a basis for experience

This explanation helps us understand why phenomena are called "elements" - they are fundamental factors that arrange our experience in saṃsāra while themselves being burdensome and beyond our control.

 

[nottibeans]

apica yathā titthiyānaṃ attā nāma sabhāvato natthi, na evametā. etā pana attano sabhāvaṃ dhārentīti dhātuyo. yathā ca loke vicittā haritālamanosilādayo silāvayavā dhātuyoti vuccanti, evametāpi dhātuyo viya dhātuyo. vicittā hetā ñāṇañeyyāvayavāti. yathā vā sarīrasaṅkhātassa samudāyassa avayavabhūtesu rasasoṇitādīsu aññamaññaṃ visabhāgalakkhaṇaparicchinnesu dhātusamaññā, evametesupi pañcakkhandhasaṅkhātassa attabhāvassa avayavesu dhātusamaññā veditabbā. aññamaññavisabhāgalakkhaṇaparicchinnā hete cakkhādayoti. apica dhātūti nijjīvamattassetaṃ adhivacanaṃ. tathā hi bhagavā – "cha dhāturo ayaṃ, bhikkhu, puriso"tiādīsu (ma. ni. 3.343-344) jīvasaññāsamūhanatthaṃ dhātudesanaṃ akāsīti. tasmā yathāvuttenatthena cakkhu ca taṃ dhātu cāti


This passage provides additional important explanations of dhātu (element). Let me break down the key points:

1. Unlike the "self" (attā) proposed by other schools (titthiyā):
- Dhātus actually possess their own nature (sabhāva)
- They "hold" (dhārenti) their own characteristics

2. The text provides three analogies:
- Like mineral elements (haritāla, manosilā) in the world
- Like bodily elements (rasa, soṇita - fluids and blood)
- Like components of the five aggregates (pañcakkhandha)

3. Key characteristics of dhātus:
- They are distinct from each other (aññamaññavisabhāga)
- They have defined characteristics (lakkhaṇaparicchinna)
- They are devoid of a "soul" or "living entity" (nijjīva)

4. The text references the Buddha's teaching:
"This person consists of six elements" (cha dhāturo ayaṃ bhikkhu puriso) - MN 140
- This teaching was given to remove the notion of a living entity (jīvasaññā)

This explanation helps understand dhātus as real but impersonal elements that make up experience, contrasting with the notion of a permanent self or soul.

 

[Ironside]

he will live here now
in great happiness and contentment,
and for him the mould has begun to form[1]
for destroying the cankers.

What six?

Herein a monk delights in Dhamma,
in growth,
in renunciation,
in solitude,
in being free of ill-will
and in non-diffuseness.

https://obo.genaud.net/dhamma-vinaya/pts/an/06_sixes/an06.078.hare.pts.htm

 

[Ironside]

I want to paste a few suttas here but there are no Bhikkhu Bodhi's version online.

 

[bigrooster]

I want to paste a few suttas here but there are no Bhikkhu Bodhi's version online.

If you have the eBook versions, can copy-paste from it.

I had earlier shared some excerpts of Bhikkhu Bodhi's translations (not available online) by copying directly from the physical book by manual typing, or I took a photo of the relevant pages using my iPhone and then transcribe them here, relying on the OCR-thingy when they work for the most part of it and appending the rest by hand.

 

[Ironside]

If you have the eBook versions, can copy-paste from it.

I had earlier shared some excerpts of Bhikkhu Bodhi's translations (not available online) by copying directly from the physical book by manual typing, or I took a photo of the relevant pages using my iPhone and then transcribe them here, relying on the OCR-thingy when they work for the most part of it and appending the rest by hand.

I will type out short notes only. So far I still have problem attaching pictures here.

 

[Ironside]

https://suttacentral.net/mn28/en/bodhi?lang=en&reference=none&highlight=false

“Friends, just as the footprint of any living being that walks can be placed within an elephant’s footprint, and so the elephant’s footprint is declared the chief of them because of its great size; so too, all wholesome states can be included in the Four Noble Truths. In what four? In the noble truth of suffering, in the noble truth of the origin of suffering, in the noble truth of the cessation of suffering, and in the noble truth of the way leading to the cessation of suffering.

 

[bigrooster]

 

[Ironside]

“Bhikkhus, sensual desires are impermanent, hollow, false, false-natured, made up of illusion, and fools’ talk.

https://suttacentral.net/mn106/en/nyanamoli-thera?lang=en&reference=none&highlight=false

 

[Ironside]

I come across the below online, is it true?

In accordance with Theravāda Vinaya Piṭaka, the Buddha has established two Vinaya rules and has taken a decision not to allow the taking of garlic as a food for Buddhist Bhikku-s and Bhikkhuni-s because of some disciplinary problems which had arisen in the Buddhist community of that time.

 

[Elnoxv]

I come across the below online, is it true?

In accordance with Theravāda Vinaya Piṭaka, the Buddha has established two Vinaya rules and has taken a decision not to allow the taking of garlic as a food for Buddhist Bhikku-s and Bhikkhuni-s because of some disciplinary problems which had arisen in the Buddhist community of that time.

Afaik, not in the forest theravada that I follow.

 

[Ironside]

Afaik, not in the forest theravada that I follow.

It said in Vinaya. I never read Vinaya before.

 

[Elnoxv]

It said in Vinaya. I never read Vinaya before.

Did a double check. Looks like for monks, they aren’t allowed due to strong odors which may be considered unclean and disrespectful in a monastic settings

More discussions here:
https://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?t=35033

 

[Ironside]

Did a double check. Looks like for monks, they aren’t allowed due to strong odors which may be considered unclean and disrespectful in a monastic settings

More discussions here:
https://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?t=35033

I thought about it, I think many times Theravada monks are offered any food that contains onion and garlic, and they eat it. So that cannot be in the Vinaya.

 

[Elnoxv]

I thought about it, I think many times Theravada monks are offered any food that contains onion and garlic, and they eat it. So that cannot be in the Vinaya.

That’s what I thought too so it could be special cases of eating raw garlics directly.

 

[Ironside]

I also come across online the below.

Some Hindus believe that `` ``Garlic and onions are both rajasic and tamasic, and are forbidden to yogis because they root the consciousness more firmly in the body.''9 Feb 2016

So this could be where the influence came from.

 

[Ironside]

That’s what I thought too so it could be special cases of eating raw garlics directly.

The Buddha himself will accept any alm food that is offered to him as long as no live was taken specially for that occasion.

 

[bigrooster]

I come across the below online, is it true?

In accordance with Theravāda Vinaya Piṭaka, the Buddha has established two Vinaya rules and has taken a decision not to allow the taking of garlic as a food for Buddhist Bhikku-s and Bhikkhuni-s because of some disciplinary problems which had arisen in the Buddhist community of that time.

IIRC, it wasn’t stipulated down in the rules for bhikkhus. But it is a pācittiya for bhikkhunīs, and has to be confessed when garlic was taken.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/vin/sv/bhikkhuni-pati.html#pc-part1