Brahmavihārā are dukkhā

[NgXinZhao]

@Vaddha

But that means that an individual continuum can’t attain nibbāna. An individual continuum doesn’t end when the aggregates end. The aggregates ending would simply be another condition in the continuum.

This is going the opposite direction to the Truly exist post, what is posted there should be here what’s posted here should be there. Haha.

Anyway, this is surprising coming from you. The whole individual continuum does end in parinibbāna. Only the corpse is left. And there’s no serious way to map, oh I am not breathing in some Oxygen which used to be a body of an arahant. So somehow the arahant’s individual continuum continues in me. No more mind that’s the point.

@Vaddha

A fire is a continuum of conditions. At certain points in time, we designate “fire.” At another point in time, we designate “the fire is extinguished.” But how could the “fire” attain a state of “extinguishment”? They are not the same condition. The thing which we called a fire is not the thing we call “extinguished.” For a “fire” to become “extinguished” it must be annihilated. But extinguishment is a separate appearance than fire; it is an appearance of a different condition. So there is no annihilation, only a new condition arising based on other conditions. The fire never becomes “extinguished,” only “extinguishment” can arise where the fire once was.

You got close, but still mistaken what I clarified before. We don’t need to posit any substance to a thing which is extinguished for it to no longer be there. Just experience of fire vs no experience of fire. Experince is directly known, no need for concepts, thinking. Truly Exist, dependently exist, dependently ceased, truly not existing In this language, 2 can become 3 by no more experiencing of 2. You seem to imply that there’s no 3.

@Vaddha

That new condition would be in the same continuum of arising events. For example, if a flame goes out, that could give rise to a change in temperature. So too, when the Buddha passed away due to causes and conditions, that gave rise to other conditions. So the continuum did not end, right?

Causal chain in the world doesn’t end, as there’s still dhamma in the world and eventually there will be no dhamma known, and the condition for next Buddha is fulfilled. But to use the label: “individual” would be wrong as there’s no more neatly bound set of things we can trace. As explained here: Self vs Individual - #5 by NgXinZhao There’s no more mind to trace the individual. As for physical things, they are able to be divided and no individual can be stamped upon atoms. They are able to be swapped. Of course, there can be psychic energies accompanying the relics. The dhamma is also replicable, and we cannot say of 2 same books on the dhamma, which is the real individual continuum of the Buddha. Here, individual has the specific meaning of one, unique, not 2 or more.

@JuanPablo

If there is no inclusion and permeability of samsara / nibbana, there would be no path, no raft, no bridge. Only inescapable suffering. They cannot be entirely autonomous, disconnected, disjointed separate systems. Hence, there is no division.

Truly Exist, dependently exist, dependently ceased, truly not existing

Here’s a thought of making it clearer on these 4 things: Truly Exist, dependently exist, dependently ceased, truly not existing Properties of truly exists: self, permanent. Properties of dependently existing things: impermanent, suffering, not self. Properties of dependently ceased things… depends, it’s a bit complicated. Properties of truly not existing things: not existing, cannot be characterized as this or that because it’s not existing in actuality. Unchanging. This is just s…

@Vaddha

I already explained my reasoning in the prior comments!

I see your reasoning, I am not sure what classification of philosophy it is in. I understand now. Not sure if it is helpful or not for liberation, but as long as people can understand properly, shouldn’t be too much of an issue.

Back to the topic:

@yeshe.tenley

Lay Non-returners in the suttas, already gave up sex and money, 2 of the important things of lay life. Arahants have to be ordained or else they die soon. It is impossible for arahants to accumulate stuffs like lay person. There can be a continuum of some people who realized the meaninglessness of lay life early and become monastics, but still not enlightened, and other ariya lay persons who still live the lay life despite having higher attaiments than some monks.

To truly understand impermanence is a lot of levels and certainly is different for each person.

Before enlightenment, the Brahmavihāras would really sound like being superheroes. It can become a trap for mara to say delay enlightenment, help others. After enlightenment, even after stream winning, I would certainly encourage more Brahmavihāras, so that the ariyas can enlighten others as many as possible as soon as possible to the other shore. Teaching is a vihesā (trouble) for the Buddha as well, for it takes time away from meditation and some people are difficult to teach. But that dukkha is mainly physical dukkha, not so much mental dukkha. Just wasted energy if someone is unresponsive.

But just to address the title. If we take seriously that all conditioned things are dukkha, then Brahmavihāra being part of conditioned things is automatically dukkha. Anyone has an issue with that just have to re-examine their own projections of the meaning of dukkha, are they mapping dukkha must always include mental suffering? No way to refute this simple thing. Cut and dry.