Advice request: text for Anapanasati Sutta self-study app

[kstan1122]

This is How Ānāpānasati is to be correctly practice.

Sīla (morality) is important for the removal of dasa akusala (ten immoral action, speech and thought) by following the mundane eightfold path, of which Sīla is first followed by Samādhi (concentration) and Paññā (wisdom) (mundane eightfold path order is Sīla Samādhi Paññā). Only when you have seen the ture nature of things (yathābhūta) which is understanding anicca, dukkha and anatta which leads to the attaining of Sotāpanna, then Noble Eightfold Path order is followed which is Paññā, Sīla and Samādhi.

[ngoonera]

@kstan1122

This is How Ānāpānasati is to be correctly practice .

Thank you for sharing that pdf file. I looked over it and the detailed analysis of the Pali terms. Unfortunately, I regret that I am not a Pali scholar, but I appreciate your clarification of the terms assa and passa. If I understand correctly, you are emphasizing the role of morality on the eightfold path, which I completely agree with. In the APS explanation text I prepared, I mentioned that advancing in one’s meditation practice requires sila, and I encourage the practitioner to take the five precepts during the period that they practice the APS.

[ngoonera]

While re-reading your post, I see that you draw a distinction between the “mundane” eightfold path and the “noble” eightfold path, which is something I have not heard before. Would you be interested in opening up a new thread on this topic and explaining this more in the new thread (separate from this thread on the APS)?

[SCMatt]

Well, maybe you should at least include the sutta with some translations in the app. SuttaCentral devs might help you integrate since it’s a Progressive Web App now. Someone here could help you with collecting the other suttas besides MN118 on anapana, there’s also a bunch of Chinese Agama Sutras on Anapana that are EBT.

I think there will be quite a lot of variation in interpretation of the sutta, especially if the teacher relies on later commentaries or on the “orthodox” Theravada rather than “just” EBT. I’m a fan of the EBT scholar Bhikkhu Analayo’s (who has btw, as a polyglot an understanding of Pali, Ancient Chinese, Tibetan and has deeply studied and practiced for years (now writing prolifically for 2 days, meditating for 5 every week)) writings on Anapana. Some excerpts here:
https://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?t=30301

[ngoonera]

@SCMatt

Well, maybe you should at least include the sutta with some translations in the app. SuttaCentral devs might help you integrate since it’s a Progressive Web App now.

Thanks for that suggestion. I’ll talk to the app developers about adding the pali as a separate item in the app.

I’d love to find some way to link the app with SuttaCentral. For example, perhaps someone using the app may have a question that they could then look up or post on SuttaCentral. One of the goals of the app is to help encourage community, and redirect our attention to the original suttas, thus it aligns with the goals of SuttaCentral as well. Is there a SuttaCentral dev that you recommend I contact?

[kstan1122]

@ngoonera

“mundane” eightfold path and the “noble” eightfold path

You may want to read this topic “Sīla, Samādhi, Pannā to Pannā, Sīla, Samādhi” to have a better understanding on training from a worldling to become a noble person.

[SCMatt]

No specific dev. @blake seems to be most active on the forum. They always have a lot on their table, so I’m really not sure about how available they would be, but I think they would be in support of integration with attribution since the SC project is all about openness.

[Mat]

You may want to read this topic “Sīla, Samādhi, Pannā to Pannā, Sīla, Samādhi 2”

Please note the Puredhamma website which this webpage is linked to should be know to promulgate distortions of basic dhamma facts and is based on the teachings of the Waharaka hamuduruwo.

[kstan1122]

@Mat

Please note the Puredhamma website which this webpage is linked to should be know to promulgate distortions of basic dhamma facts and is based on the teachings of the Waharaka hamuduruwo.

Kindly provide your own proof that the website has distortions of the basic dhamma of the tipitaka.

Kindly lists the web topics that has such distortion.

Writing such allegation without support of proof is equivalent to falsehood.

[Coemgenu]

They have fake etymologies on that site. That site has been refuted so many times both here and on DhammaWheel I cannot count.

This is a copy-paste of only one of those times.

@kstan1122

saṅkhāra = san + kara where san is the good and bad things we acquire and kara is the act of doing , so saṅkhāra is the action done with san , thus saṅkhāra is an intentional action that carries kamma.

@kstan1122’s beliefs surrounding the ‘saṅ’ in ‘saṅkhara’ mirror those published on the website “Pure Dhamma”. These idiosyncratic teachings are further an extension of the Dhamma dispensation of Ven Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero.

The etymology given follows after the etymological analysis at Pure Dhamma. This page in particular seems a likely candidate:

Saṅkhāra - What It Really Means | Pure Dhamma

This is a quote from the page:

It comes from “san” + “kāra” or actions that involve “san“; see, “What is “San”? Meaning of Sansāra (or Samsāra)“.

Therefore, “san” is associated with anything that is associated with the world of 31 realms. They are responsible for a wide variety of effects ranging from giving rise to future births (as in abhisankhāra) to just getting things done to living the current life.

By the way, it would have been better to spell the word as sankāra, instead of sankhāra, but it is too late to change since that could cause problems with, for example, Google searches.

As we can see, Pure Dhamma follows the hypothesis that the authentic Pāli meanings and etymologies of key words have been lost and that they can be reconstructed following the teachings of the aforementioned Venerable. These reconstructed etymologies generally seem to involve reading Pāli words with Sinhala pronunciations (removing aspirations, etc) and meanings derived from modern Sinhala words that are loanwords from Pāli. In the above example they claim that the “kha” in sankhara ought rightly not be aspirated (i.e. “sankara”).

If Ven @Dhammanando does not mind I would like to cut-and-paste a quote from the DhammaWheel thread addressing Pure Dhamma. In the above excerpt from Pure Dhamma, it recommends the reader view a page called “What is “San”? Meaning of Sansāra (or Samsāra)“, it seems Ven Dhammanando happens to analyze just that same very page:

@Dhammanando

@rajitha7

Would you be able to show the 3 the most significant errors you find there, please?

[…]

[…] I’ll return to the subject, though not in the way that you request. Instead I propose to take a close look at just one randomly selected page from the Pure Dhamma website. (Actually I started out by randomly selecting three pages, intending to comment on all of them, but there were so many mistakes on just the first one that I’ve decided to call it a day).

The page in question purports to be about the meaning of the saṃ part of the word saṃsāra and is found in a section of the website ominously entitled “Key Dhamma Concepts that have Been Hidden”. […]

The article opens with the exciting revelation of a Pali term whose meaning has allegedly been “hidden for thousands of years” but has now been rediscovered.
[…]

@Pure Dhamma

1. A key word, the meaning of which has been hidden for thousands of years, is “san” (pronounced like son).

Sad to say, saṃ is actually one of the most common prefixes in Pali and Sanskrit, as well as in many modern Indian languages. There is no mystery to the word at all. Functionally it’s simply the Indic equivalent of the Latin “com-”. Its range of meanings in both Pali and Sanskrit is well-known and well-documented and at no time has its meaning been “hidden”.

However, by asserting that the meaning of some key Pali term has been hidden or lost or misunderstood by lesser mortals, messianic revisionist Theravadins grant themselves the luxury of assigning whatever new meaning they like to it…

@Pure Dhamma

“San’ is basically the term for “good and bad things we acquire” while we exist anywhere in the 31 realms; see, “The Grand Unified Theory of Dhamma“.

Not according to the texts, which consistently explain saṃ in the noun saṃsāra and in the verb saṃsarati as being a term used in the sense of abbocchinnaṃ an adverb meaning ‘continuously’ or ‘without interruption’. For example:

Khandhānañ’ ca paṭipāṭi, dhātu-āyatanāna ca,
Abbocchinnaṃ vattamānā, saṃsāro’ ti pavuccatī ti.

The process of the aggregates, elements and bases,
Proceeding without interruption is called ‘saṃsāra’.
(DA. ii. 496)

@Pure Dhamma

2. There is also a reason for calling what we “pile up” as “san“. In Pali and Sinhala, the word for numbers is “sankhyä“, and sankhyä = “san” + “khyä“, meaning (add &multiply) + (subtract & divide), i.e., sankhya is what is used for addition, multiplication, subtraction, and division. From this, “san” gives the idea of “piling up” (addition and multiplication); “khyä” gives the idea of “removal” (subtraction and division).

Therefore “san” is used to indicate things we do in the sansaric journey; see below for examples.

It’s correct that the saṃ- in saṃsāra and the saṅ- in saṅkhyā are one and the same verbal prefix. But from their sharing of the same prefix it doesn’t follow that the meaning of saṃsāra can be derived from the meaning of saṅkhyā.

We wouldn’t say, for example, that the meaning of ‘transport’ can be inferred from the meaning of ‘transgender’, or that the meaning of ‘confetti’ can shed light on the meaning of ‘community’ just because the two items in each pair happen to share the same Latin prefixes.

@Pure Dhamma

“Khyä” or “Khaya” is used to indicate removal. Nibbana is attained via removal of defilements (raga, dosa, moha), and thus Nibbana is “ragakkhaya“, “dosakkhaya“, and “mohakkhaya“.

Etymologically there is no connection between the -khyā in saṅkhyā and the khaya in rāgakkhaya. One is derived from the verb saṅkhāyati (to count or calculate) and the other from the verb khayati (to wither). The disparateness of the two can be seen even more starkly in Sanskrit, where their respective cognates are saṅkhāyati and kṣinoti.

Like ‘dick’ and ‘dyke’ or ‘blob’ and ‘bulb’, khaya and khyā are unrelated words that just happen to share two consonants.

@Pure Dhamma

Just by knowing this, it is possible to understand the roots of many common words, such as sankhara, sansara, sanna, samma, etc. Let us analyze some of these words.

The writer seems to be confusing roots (dhātu) and prefixes (upasagga). Saṅkhāra, saṃsāra, and saññā all share the prefix saṃ. But their roots — and it is these, not the prefixes that are the primary source of a Pali word’s meaning — are √khar (= Skt. kṛ), √sar (= sṛ), and √ñā (= jñā) respectively.

As for sammā, this is an indeclinable particle (nipāta) and as such has no verbal root and no relationship whatever with the three nouns.

@Pure Dhamma

4. Another important term “samma” which comes from “san” + “mä“, which means “to become free of san“. For example:

“Mä hoti jati, jati“, means “may I be free of repeated birth”.

The word mā is a prohibitive particle (“Don’t!” Let it not!”). It’s also an indeclinable, which means it’s neither reducible nor modifiable nor combinable with other words. Indeclinables are to Pali philology what inert gases are to chemistry. As such it has no more to do with the mā sound in sammā than it does with the mā sound in Māra or marble or marzipan or Margate or Marlene Dietrich. It just happens to sound the same.

@Pure Dhamma

5. Knowing the correct meaning of such terms, leads to clear understanding of many terms:

Indeed. And like so many things in this world, the correct meaning is not arrived at merely by wishing it were so.

@Pure Dhamma

Sansära (or samsara) = san + sära (meaning fruitful) = perception that “san” are good, fruitful. Thus one continues in the long rebirth process with the wrong perception that it is fruitful.

The sāra in saṃsāra doesn’t mean fruitful. In the Suttas the Buddha connects the noun saṃsāra with the verb saṃsarati. This verb’s primary meaning is to repeatedly come (or go) somewhere or to wander or move about continuously. From this we get the secondary meaning, to transmigrate.

@Pure Dhamma

Sammä = san + mä (meaning eliminate) = eliminate or route out “san”. Thus Samma Ditthi is routing out the wrong views that keeps one bound to sansara.

No, this is both etymologically wrong and factually wrong as to what sammādiṭṭhi is. What the writer is describing is diṭṭhujukamma, the action of straightening of one’s views. If one is successful at this then sammādiṭṭhi is the result.

@Pure Dhamma

Sandittiko = san + ditthi (meaning vision) = ability to see “san”; one becomes sanditthiko at the Sotapanna stage. Most texts define sandittiko with inconsistent words like, self-evident, immediately apparent, visible here and now, etc.

There are two traditional etymologies for sandiṭṭhiko, one of which gives rise to the translation “to be seen by oneself” and the other to translations like “self-evident”. But regardless of which of these one prefers, the term is one of the special qualities of the Dhamma, not of any person. And so to speak of somebody “becoming” sandiṭṭhiko at the sotāpanna stage is nonsensical.

@Pure Dhamma

6. A nice example to illustrate the significance of “san”, is to examine the verse that Ven. Assaji delivered to Upatissa (the lay name of Ven. Sariputta, who was a chief disciple of the Buddha):

“Ye dhamma hetu pabbava, te san hetun Thathagatho aha, Te san ca yo nirodho, evan vadi maha Samano”

Te = three, hetu = cause, nirodha = nir+uda = stop from arising

The translation is now crystal clear:

“All dhamma (in this world) arise due to causes arising from the three “san”s: raga, dosa, moha. The Buddha has shown how to eliminate those “san”s and thus stop dhamma from arising”

This part is the clearest evidence so far that the author is attempting to explain points of Pali without having learned anything of the language at all. The word tesaṃ is simply the demonstrative pronoun te (‘this’, ‘that’) in the genitive plural case. It means “of these”, “of those”. The saṃ part is an inflectional ending ([i]
vibhatti). It has absolutely nothing to do with the prefix saṃ in saṃsāra.

@Pure Dhamma

7. […]

Each Pali word is packed with lot of information, and thus commentaries were written to expound the meaning of important Pali words.

A good example is the key Pali word “anicca“. In Sanskrit it is “anitya“, and this is what normally translated to English as “impermanence”. But the actual meaning of anicca is very clear in Sinhala: The Pali word “icca” (pronounced “ichcha”) is the same in Sinhala, with the idea of “this is what I like”. Thus anicca has the meaning “cannot keep it the way I like”.

The nicca in anicca has nothing to do with the adjective iccha (wishing) or the noun icchā (a wish) or the verb icchati (to wish).

The colloquial Sinhala pronunciation of it is actually a mispronunciation when judged by the phonetic descriptions in the ancient Pali grammars. When Sri Lankans pronounce Pali words their commonest mistake is to make aspirated consonants into non-aspirates and non-aspirated consonants into aspirates. This can be seen in the unorthodox romanization system used at the Pure Dhamma site:

gathi instead of gati
hethu-pala instead of hetu-phala.
micca-ditthi instead of micchā-diṭṭhi
satipattana instead of satipaṭṭhāna
Etc., etc.

By contrast, this is the international standard used by indologists for over a century:

ක ඛ ග ඝ ඞ
ka, kha, ga, gha, ṅa

ච ඡ ජ ඣ ඤ
ca, cha, ja, jha, ña

ට ඨ ඩ ඪ ණ
ṭa, ṭha, ḍa, ḍha, ṇa

ත ථ ද ධ න
ta, tha, da, dha, na

ප ඵ බ භ ම
pa, pha, ba, bha, ma

ය ර ල ව ස හ ළ ං
ya, ra, la, va, sa, ha, ḷa, ṃ

Conclusion

The Pure Dhamma website offers a variety of revisionist readings of the Pali Suttas based upon the site-owner’s (or his guru’s) claimed re-discovery of supposed hidden meanings of key Pali terms.
These proposed hidden meanings, when not presented merely as bald assertions, are defended by resort to Pali philological analysis.
But since the site-owner is demonstrably incompetent in both Indic philology in general and Pali in particular his arguments are undeserving of credence. Rather than leading to the true understanding of the Dhamma via the revelation of higher (but long-concealed) meanings, they lead only to baloney.

[kstan1122]

Sad to say that for those who still think that Pure Dhamma website is a distortion of the tipitaka, that is because that they still have moha followed by dosa and then lobha which is the reasons why they are not able to see the deeper meaning of the true dhamma.

Cleansing the mind is the first step on the correct path to nibbana. For those who have not cleansed the mind that has been clouded with the ten unwholesome actions (dasa akusala) their mind will not be able to accept what Pure Dhamma is trying to teach and will try at all cost to discredit the website (Pure Dhamma) even though it is the true dhamma.

[sujato]

Thanks for posting this, and for Ven @Dhammanando for taking the time to explain.

The hardest part with responding to the Waharaka imaginings is to convince people that they really are as incomprehensibly wrong-headed as they seem. There have been many weird and wonderful interpretations of Buddhism through the millennia, but I can’t think of a single one anywhere that even approaches this level. It’s almost magnificent in its sheer, audacious disconnect from any form of truth. Almost!

[Viveka]

@kstan1122

Sad to say that for those who still think that Pure Dhamma website is a distortion of the tipitaka, that is because that they still have moha followed by dosa and then lobha which is the reasons why they are not able to see the deeper meaning of the true dhamma.

Dear Kstan, Please read the SC discourse guidelines here

Universal Rules of Dhamma Discourse

This is a friendly place for Dhamma discussion Participating in this forum should be taken as an opportunity to practice Right Speech. As such, please show the forum and your fellow practitioners the same respect shown in a temple. We, too, are a community spiritual center — a space to share Dhamma ideas, understandings and questions in a supportive atmosphere. We are delighted to have you participate in this forum, but if you choose to do so please note that we will understand your participat…

Firstly participation in this forum is dependent upon agreeing to abide by the guidelines linked above.

Second, I direct attention to the following passage from the guidelines

@sujato

Be agreeable, especially when you disagree

Be respectful of the topics and the people discussing them, even if you disagree with some of what is being said. It’s fine if you do wish to respond to something by disagreeing with it: the Buddha said we should praise what should be praised, and criticize what should be criticized. But remember the advice of the Araṇavibhaṅga Sutta (MN 139): criticize ideas, not people .

Please avoid:

• Name-calling.
• Ad hominem attacks.
• Responding to a post’s tone instead of its actual content.
• Knee-jerk contradiction.
• Passive-aggressive tactics.
• Psycho-analysing other commenters.
• Threatening people with kammic retribution!

Asserting that people do not understand your point of view because they are subject to defilements, and will understand it when they become enlightened, falls under the the two examples of unacceptable discussion methods highlighted in bold above.

Furthermore consider

@sujato

Debate Constructively, Don’t Quarrel

Step away from discussions that have become combative. Rigorous debate can be an important part of Dhamma enquiry and many debates are recorded in the Early Buddhist Texts. However, it’s even more important to recognise the difference between a debate and a quarrel. The Buddha said: “I assert and proclaim [my teaching] in such a way that one does not quarrel with anyone in the world” (Madhupiṇḍika Sutta, MN 18).

Evaluating Your Posts

Before attempting to correct someone else’s ideas, use MN 103 and AN 4.100 to help you carefully assess whether making such a post would be wise. If you are unsure about whether your contribution will be beneficial to others because of, for example, its phrasing, or timing, try to find a better way to express yourself, or don’t post.

Discourse provides tools that enable the community to collectively identify the best (and worst) contributions: bookmarks, likes, flags, replies, edits, and so forth. Use these tools to improve your own experience, and everyone else’s, too.

Let’s try to leave our temple better than we found it.

Viveka
(on behalf of the moderators)

[kstan1122]

Can any body claim that they do not have moha, dosa and lobha? Even I myself do not claim that I do not have moha, dosa and lobha. As long as one is not enlightened, that person still has the moha, dosa and lobha. So, we are still worldings and not arahants, we still have moha, dosa and lobha which should be acceptable to all.

[Nimal]

@kstan1122

So, we are still worldings and not arahants, we still have moha, dosa and lobha which should be acceptable to all.

This is exactly why we need truly pure Dhamma and not one shrouded in “artificially pure Dhamma” like Dhamma expounded by the Pure Dhamma web site misleading those venture in to that site looking for true Dhamma.
I personally know several people who follow the misinterpretations propagated by Ven: Vaharaka and Ven: Abhaya. The most unfortunate thing IMO opinion is that almost all of them claim to have reached the fourth jhana and some openly call themselves Sotapannas.
I recently attended a retreat conducted by Ven: Abhaya out of sheer curiosity and asked him why he interprets “paticca” as “tightening with greed” which is how he literally translates “paticca”.

He explained that “paticca” comes from the two words “pati” and “iccha”. “pati” is a sinhala word meaning belt, like the garment used to tighten our pants and “iccha” as we all know is the Pali word meaning desire or greed etc. So combined we get his purpoted meaning “tightening with greed”. Obviously dismayed by this interpretation, I then asked him if it was appropriate to use two languages - Sinhala and Pali - to translate the word “paticca” and he without any hesitation said “yes”.

There were at least fifty people at this occasion and except for one or two people everyone accepted his interpretation.

I am citing this incident just to show how mired a lot of their followers are in delusion and I find how relevant the Buddhas declaration “avijja paccaya sankhara” - ignorance conditions formations - is.

With Metta

[sujato]

@Nimal

There were at least fifty people at this occasion and except for one or two people everyone accepted his interpretation.

Can you feel it? That weird sensation? It’s a dimming and a darkening, as if intelligence were being sucked out of the world.

[verajip]

@Nimal

He explained that “paticca” comes from the two words “pati” and “iccha”. “pati” is a sinhala word meaning belt,

I was curious as you and started following his talks and when I saw how he translated words I was shocked! I even asked the monks here about their view on his translations of “anatta” as I was super confused.
That’s just not right. He is truly lost. When he was a lay person he used to do a lot of exorcism stuff. The videos are on you tube. I have a feeling that because he believed so much in this craft he probably lost his way.

If there are people in this forum who are following his path please find a true kalyanamitta.

[Viveka]

This thread has well and truly been exhausted and run it’s course. For related issues, a new topic may be started