Ajahn Sumedho's quote about the Unconditioned

[Peter_Durham]

Hi SarathW1
It was not written by Ajahn Sumedho. It is a transcription of a dhamma talk given by Ajahn Sumedho.

[SarathW1]

@Peter_Durham

I don’t believe that Ajahn Sumedho writes books.

Interesting.
I have seen some other mistakes in his other transcripts but I did not want to discuss them here as I could not substantiate them. It is good if we have someone close to Ajahn Sumedho to clarify these issues.
The issue brought up in OP is not a minor issue. That statement completely misrepresents the Buddha.
Monks such as Ajahn Sumedho are the face of Western Buddhism. Their words matters.

[SarathW1]

@mpac

I think this level of deconstruction, ie focusing on one word…

The matter questioned in OP is very critical which deny the state of Nibbana.
What is the point of attaining Nibbana if we are going to re-emerge from it.

[Viveka]

If there is no self, then there is no ‘you’ to worry about what happens after Nibbanna

[SarathW1]

@mpac

If there is no self, then there is no ‘you’ to worry about what happens after Nibbanna

The is why Buddha refuse to answer these type of questions. But with that statement it appears Ajahn Sumedho is trying to answer a question which Buddha refuse to do.
This question is already solved by Bhante Sujato and no point of arguing about it.
Thank God he is here!

[Viveka]

Perhaps the issue is then about how much material is transcribed and published. For people like myself who live in isolated places and rely on the internet for any Dhamma contact, the streaming and transcription of talks is wonderful. However it comes at the price of so much material being online, and being circulated in part or whole. It would be impossible to subject each word of every talk to such a strict Standard, that there are no seeming inconsistencies. Perhaps when reading the transcripts of talks (spontaneous speech for a specific person or audience), then they should be read as such and a corresponding weight applied. Simmilarly, what is specifically composed for publication would be read and weighted accordingly.

[SarathW1]

@mpac

It would be impossible to subject each word of every talk to such a strict Standard, that there are no seeming inconsistencies.

It appears you do not understand the weight of this matter.

[DKervick]

@SarathW1

Thank God he is here!

The belief in a God who is the source of our blessings is incompatible with the EBTs. I hereby find you in violation of the Code of Buddhist Dogmatics, section 7, subsection 39.

[SarathW1]

@DKervick

The belief in a God who is the source of our blessings is incompatible with the EBTs.

It depend on which God you are talking about. I am talking about the gods in Rupavacara planes.

[DKervick]

Did they send Sujato?

[SarathW1]

I think so!

[Charlie]

@anon31486827

Would you say the quote is in agreement with the EBTs?

How about AN 10.58

All phenomena gain their footing in the deathless.
All phenomena have Unbinding as their final end.

[Mat]

@Charlie

How about AN 10.58

All phenomena gain their footing in the deathless.

All phenomena have Unbinding as their final end.

‘chandamūlakā, āvuso, sabbe dhammā
“‘Friends, (1) all things are rooted in desire. AN10.58

Sorry, I think there is a different translation here. Incidentally I think ‘Dhamma’ makes most sense as in ‘teachings’, rather than ‘phenomena’ (there was a thread on this) in this context.

The ‘rooted in nibbana’ comes from the below sentence, which on SC is translated as:

(9) They culminate in the deathless. (10) Their consummation is nibbāna.’ AN10.58

with metta

[Charlie]

@Mat

The ‘rooted in nibbana’ comes from the below sentence, which on SC is translated as:

I would expect there to be multiple translations. The key in this situation is how Ajahn Sumedho understands it as opposed to you or I. The translation on SC is also referring to phenomena.

[Martin]

@Mat

I think this is referring to ‘arising and passing’ (udaya - vaya, udayattagamini?)away, as seen in ‘insight’ meditation. This is as someone correctly said, IMO, things arising from emptiness (not Nibbana) and falling back into emptiness.

By “emptiness” here, do you mean the empty space of the mind?

[Mat]

@Charlie

The key in this situation is how Ajahn Sumedho understands it

Well it won’t be possible to even make an informed guess without hearing the talk it came from. There are a few possible explanations.

This (see below) isn’t one of them, hopefully, as it is not in line with the Dhamma-Vinaya, though that might be of little consequence to some.

@Mat

All phenomena gain their footing in the deathless.

[Mat]

@Martin

M: I think this is referring to ‘arising and passing’ (udaya - vaya, udayattagamini?)away, as seen in ‘insight’ meditation. This is as someone correctly said, IMO, things arising from emptiness (not Nibbana) and falling back into emptiness.

W: By “emptiness” here, do you mean the empty space of the mind?

Yes (without getting into ultimate conventional explanations).

Example: keep watching the breath and when the in-breath fades away, and the mindfulness is still focused on the same ‘spot’, what is it ‘watching’? The ‘gap’ between the first breath and the second, or between any two experiences, is empty of phenomena, is akasa.

No one would say someone watching a breath for the first few minutes sees a gap and this being Nibbana, have attained stream entry. That isn’t possible and it isn’t Nibbāna.

Also this use of the word ‘conditioned’- it sounds more psychological and it least could be confused with it, IMO.

With metta

[Sujith]

@Mat

Sorry, I think there is a different translation here. Incidentally I think ‘Dhamma’ makes most sense as in ‘teachings’, rather than ‘phenomena’ (there was a thread on this) in this context.

I think ‘things’ or ‘phenomena’ are correct. The sutta answers various questions regarding the nature of phenomena. ‘All Teachings are rooted in desire’ doesn’t seem to be in place when the rest of the discourse goes on to describe and explain various other attributes regarding phenomena. Thanissaro’s note explains more.

Would you happen to have a link to the thread in which this was discussed ?

[Aminah]

I’m quite aligned with the ‘some things aren’t necessarily profitably explored through the clunky medium of language (or at least not without incredibly sensitive use on the both the ‘sender’ and ‘receiver’ side of things) and the even clunkier medium of internet forum’ line already hinted towards by some above.

As such, I’ll only stop by long enough to note a possible link between two statements I don’t understand that may or may not be relevant to the OP:

You cannot find anything in the five khandhas which is a permanent self or soul: things arise out of the Unconditioned, they go back to the Unconditioned. Therefore it is through letting go rather than through adapting any other attitude, that we no longer seek to attach to mortal conditions. (Ajahn Sumedho’s quote)

There is, monks, an unborn, unbecome, unmade, unconditioned. If, monks there were not that unborn, unbecome, unmade, unconditioned, you could not know an escape here from the born, become, made, and conditioned. But because there is an unborn, unbecome, unmade, unconditioned, therefore you do know an escape from the born, become, made, and conditioned. (Ud8.3)

Elsewhere, Bhante Sujato has noted that, “It is generally agreed that the background stories in the Udana are somewhat later than the bulk of the nikayas”, but going by his and Ajahn Brahmali’s authenticity text, the ‘inspired utterances’ themselves, seem to be accepted as belonging to the early layers of material. That said, 1) my lack of understanding may have obscured some much clearer distinction between these two statements from me, or 2) this udana may be an exception (authenticity-wise) and more importantly, 3) Vstakan’s ‘multiple mutually corroborating references/statements’ point above, is certainly one I favour.

[TheThinker]

The Atthakavagga is my favourite read. I would ask is this one of the earliest texts?