Raftafarian wrote
In a nutshell, the Atthakavagga requires the cessation of perception as recognition for liberation and the Parayanavagga requires the cessation of consciousness (the ultimate liberation from perception as discernment).
Can you explain the difference between perception and consciousness as you understand?
I appreciate the time you took to interpret the various verses, in Sutta Nipata. It helps me figure out how the Theravadins influenced by abhidhamma interpreted these suttas in Atthakavagga and Parayana. The main issue for me is:
Nama-rupa was treated differently by the earliest Buddhists, this difference seems inconsequential to some.
Yet it makes a world of difference in how the scripture was interpreted by later schools, Vibajjavadin for instance.
The difference in the interpretation of rupa takes a toll on the very liberating process presented by Buddha. The critical importance of underlying tendencies was explained away. Latter is something Frauwallner gets into in detail, in his studies of Abhidhamma.
Content of Kalaha vivada sutta provides clues as to the original presentation of dependent origination. Later Paticca samuppada was standardized by abhidhamma experts. What did it look like before the scholars interfered with it?
I commented on Kalaha Vivada on another website. I took into account the different translations of Sn 4.11 available at Sutta Central, from Portuguese ranging to Sinhalese, and translated them back into English with the help of friends. It is surprising how the translations differ, in some cases.
Correct understanding of nama-rupa is fundamental to the understanding of Sn 4.11?
Out of the 14 different translations available on SC the one by A.P. de Zoysa pinpointed that
âformlessâ in Sn 4.11. is not a reference to the âformlessâ in Arupa samapatti.
The influence of abhidhamma infiltrated all areas of understanding within Theravada, Theravada abhidhamma imbibed Arupa samapatthis into the doctrine. Thanissaro noted in his translation of Sn 4.11, (verse 881)
2.
According to Nd.I, this passage is describing the four formless jhanas, but as the first three of the formless jhanas involve perception (of infinite space, infinite consciousness, and nothingness), only the fourth of the formless jhanas â the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception â would fit this description. See AN 10. 176.
(Kosala Sutta: The Kosalan).
link Kalaha-vivada Sutta: Quarrels & Disputes
This shows how abhidhamma struggled to fit the teaching in SN 4.11 into their abhidhamma mould. On the other hand, if we leave out the influence of Abhidhamma, verse 881 reads âŠ
To summarize the intention behind Sn 4.11 briefly:
What is the cause of our preferences and attachments? It is the misdirected mind, specifically the wrongly applied faculty of apperception or sanna. Apperception creates the subject/object duality, and grasping which leads to conflicts. If you do not latch onto things seen, heard etc, you can walk through life without problems.
Naming what arises as rupa (rupa is a cognitive feature) has a forceful consequence. Nama-Rupa leads to a new consciousness, with a new identity. The root of apperception âIâ and âmineâ creates greed, and tendency to own annoyances, or pleasure. Outcome is Kalaha Vivada. The translation of Sn 881 would have read better if the translators used apperception instead of perception.
I will stop now, and await your response. Perhaps I will comment a little more when I find more time, and also find the right words.
Finally a big Thank you for initiating this dialogue on Atthakavagga, which I hold in great esteem.
Regards