How can we understand the fact that DN 11 speaks of a luminous consciousness beyond the world?

The Watercooler
61

Hi Charlie,

It’s actually the opposite - the composers of verses change words around.

I’m not much of a Pali expert, but from my experience with chanting Pali verses I can see that the word order is quite often changed to match the meter (as Bhante Sujato explains in his notes for that verse in DN11). I forget the proper technical term, but in common with many languages (such as Latin and modern languages based on Latin, but not much in English) Pali words change depending on what they are referring to, so you can tell which are modifying which even if the order is scrambled.

2 Likes
62

But doesn’t this imply that other translators aren’t aware of this? I think they know their way around Pali - have probably chanted a bit. Ven. Nanananda writes extensively in The Mind Stilled on this topic accompanied with many references, support from multiple suttas and examples. So nobody sees this except Ven Sujato who also happens to express - let’s say a strong opinion - that there are no references to vinanna outside of dependent origination? Seems quite odd to me.

1 Like
63

Agree. But words have to be used, and are used, to try to convey something beyond them. When one spiritual tradition uses words like timeless awareness bliss and another uses words with the same or similar meanings it’s fair to infer that they’re both pointing to an indescribable, ineffable “something” (which, of course, is not a thing in the usual sense).
Otherwise, they could just say, as the Buddha did, “cessation.”

Agree.

Agree. But then some add an “ineffable something” after “extinguished.”

Agree, but we may say that those adding the words and what they’re pointing to are those who add a “something” beyond cessation.

1 Like
64

Hi, :slight_smile:

As A.K. Warder wrote in his Pali grammar (who is one of the experts of Pali verse): “Poetic licence is most noticeable in the freedom of word order in verse.” So it’s based on knowledge of verse meter, and on the fact that ananta elsewhere is always the direct qualifier of viññana.

If you don’t know Pali, the confusion is understandable. But word order is among the last things to consider when translating Pali. And that’s not only in verse. Even outside of verse word order of Pali is much more free than in English, because like Latin it is a heavily inflected language and the meaning of the words generally isn’t determined by the order but by the grammatical case. From wikipedia: “Languages having cases often exhibit free word order, as thematic roles are not required to be marked by position in the sentence.”

It gives reason to rethink but it isn’t inherently problematic. Perhaps they simply haven’t considered the possibility of changing the word order. In fact, Ven. Sujato in some previous version of his translation also didn’t. Translators also influence each other, and when things are obscure they often tend to choose to “simply” follow previous translators.

Also, you’re arguing based on authority. Which is problematic in general but even more so here, because other translators, as you will probably know, also interpret it in a variety of ways, regardless of word order. As Bhikkhu Bodhi has written, “These lines [of verse] have been a perennial challenge to Buddhist scholarship,” so it’s not like it’s heretical to suggest a new interpretation.

So who are we to believe? If we would for some reason be forced to go by authority, then it’s best to follow the commentaries, being representative of the Pali tradition as a whole. That’s also a problem, though, because most interpreters also don’t follow the commentarial interpretation here.

Depending on how you look at it, all of them.

In this case it doesn’t even really change the meaning; it just clarifies what Ven. Sujato thinks is going on. Because whether I say “a red, fast car” or a “fast, red car” it doesn’t really make a difference.

The problem here, though, is that many interpreters make a whole lot out of anidassana yet tend to kind of gloss over ananta.

3 Likes
65

Strange! Humans Glow in Visible Light

Humans glow in visible light

The human body literally glows, emitting a visible light in extremely small quantities at levels that rise and fall with the day, scientists reveal.

I always found it strange when people said that we are beings of light, or that the mind is luminous.

Then I found this scientific work that shows that the human body emits visible light.

Then I thought it had some connection with the beings of light described in various religions and with the luminous mind in Theravada Buddhism.

:anjal:

1 Like
66

Well, the million dollar question to be asked is :grin:

Is this ‘luminous consciousness’ atta? viz. as per SN22.59

  1. Does it lead to affliction?
    (IMO, since it gets ‘covered over’ by ordinary consciousness - yes, it’s afflicted.)
  2. Can I compel it to be the way I want?
    (Nope, can’t make it appear on demand!)
  3. Is it eternal, unchanging and imperishable?
    (Perhaps.)
  4. Is it happiness?
    (Hmmm…)

You should truly see any kind of consciousness at all—past, future, or present; internal or external; coarse or fine; inferior or superior; far or near: all consciousness—with right understanding: ‘This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self.’
Yaṁ kiñci viññāṇaṁ atītānāgatapaccuppannaṁ ajjhattaṁ vā bahiddhā vā oḷārikaṁ vā sukhumaṁ vā hīnaṁ vā paṇītaṁ vā yaṁ dūre santike vā, sabbaṁ viññāṇaṁ: ‘netaṁ mama, nesohamasmi, na meso attā’ti evametaṁ yathābhūtaṁ sammappaññāya daṭṭhabbaṁ.

1 Like
67

Sure, translation is difficult. I was merely commenting on your comment about word order. Ven Nanananda certainly makes some very compelling points about this issue and I think that it’s helpful to see these different possible interpretations.

1 Like
68

@Jasudho

When one spiritual tradition uses words like timeless awareness bliss and another uses words with the same or similar meanings it’s fair to infer that they’re both pointing to an indescribable, ineffable “something” (which, of course, is not a thing in the usual sense).

In this case, the inference is completely understandable, but that does not make it right.

Consider this: Two people each see an object. They both describe what they see. They both say, it is red, it has wheels, it has tyres, it has number plates the front and rear, it has an engine, it seats two and it travels along a road. It would be reasonable to assume that both people were talking about the same thing, except one was talking about a Mack truck and the other a Ferrari.
In the case of meditative experiences, rather than simply looking at the endpoint, one must also examine the path which took the meditator to that experience. The path of “insight”, knowledge of the three signs of being, knowledge of dependent origination, leads to a quite different freedom than that gained through any other means.
Talking about the end point before understanding the path is, as Luang Poo Dune, puts it, “putting the cart before the horse”. This is why talking a step back to examine the path that non-Buddhists practise is the only true way of comparing end results.

1 Like
69

Thanks.
But either way, the discussion is whether final nibbāna is cessation or not. If not, there’s not much difference in whether one spiritual path leads to one kind of timeless “whatever” or a different kind of timeless “whatever.”

Or maybe the most direct and simplest ending of all dukkha is via complete nirodha, as is pointed to many times in the suttas.

Discussions about this topic can be quite interesting but they also tend to round and round, so with much respect and well-wishes, I’ll retire from this thread. :pray:

2 Likes
70

I never read such a thing. Sutta’s refer to the cessation of the khandha’s, defilements, rebirth, bhava, but there is not a sutta that says that parinibbana is a mere cessation.

A mere cessation introduces a very weird idea ofan escape of samsara. An extreme. ‘There is no escape but to cease’. That is a quit extreme and strange idea of escape, right?

If it is a mere cessation, then it is also very clear that the Tathagata does not exist after death. Yes i know, then one uses intellectual force and reasons that he does not even exist while alive, but that is nowhere said. What is said is that the Tathagata is deep, unfathomable and that does not sound at all as non-existing while alive. It does sound more like…one cannot really desribe the Tathagata. Objectivation comes to an end.

1 Like
71

Well, if you can show me where ananta is the qualifier for vinnana within the context of what the Arahat experiences then you have a chance of convincing me.

I am not confused.

Another possibility is that some of them know exactly what they are talking about and wouldn’t take on such a task if they didn’t (their own direct experience). Have you considered this?
Let me give you an example, Ven. Nanananda gave his talks on Nibanna the Mind Stilled after his preceptor asked him to - several times as I recall. His preceptor was the same monk that is guiding a lay woman as she goes through stream entry to that of Anagami in the sequence of letters titled Freed Freedom. I can’t imagine someone making such a determination for another unless they knew for themselves.

Ven Nanananda:
In 1962 he graduated from the University of Peradeniya specializing in Pali Studies,then taught Pali for a while before:
He ordained in 1967
While at Nissarana Vanaya, at the invitation of the Ven. Matara Sri Nanarama Mahathera, [he ] delivered 33 sermons on the subject of Nibbana [1988.08.12 – 1991 ].

Of course, some folks will just assume he has ‘adopted Mahayana views’ because what he tries to explain just doesn’t match their conceptual understanding. Minds tend to do that sort of thing.

1 Like
72

Ah, so I do have a chance! :smiley: (I’m not trying to convince anyone to be clear. I’m just defending my own interpretation of the text and answering the topic question to the best of my undrestanding, whatever the outcome of that may be.)

DN16 comes to mind first, but there will be others:

Then the Buddha entered the first absorption. Emerging from that, he entered the second absorption. Emerging from that, he successively entered into and emerged from the third absorption, the fourth absorption, the dimension of infinite space, the dimension of infinite consciousness (= viñnāṇa ananta), the dimension of nothingness, and the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception. Then he entered the cessation of perception and feeling.

You seem to be assuming that Ven. Ñāṇananda’s view is based on insight and Ven. Sujato’s is just “conceptual”. But that’s just a matter of faith on your behalf. I don’t share that faith.

I’ve also been teaching Pāli for almost a decade. Does that make my interpretation inherently more correct than yours or someone else’s who hasn’t much experience with Pāli? If that’d be my argument, you wouldn’t accept it either, I suspect.

But that aside, one can be fully enlightened and a good Pali scholar but still misunderstand certain passages. Because interpretation of texts is largely a conceptual undertaking.

So perhaps we can discuss the suttas based on the suttas? :slight_smile:

3 Likes
73

Clever but no cigar. ananta in this case is part of the term infinite consciousness which in turn is specifying which dimension is being spoken of not specifically the experience of the Arahat. But it does prove the point I made earlier that when you have an expression with several words put together you just can’t move them around. I am saying that vinnana anidassana has a specific meaning - you can’t break it apart because ananta is applied to the term vinanna anidassana not vinnana.

It is more nuanced than that (pm me if you wish).

Yes - it’s a dead language spoken to a dead culture.

Depends on the content. The suttas are essentially a factory service manual for your vehicle (be it greater or lesser). If you want to translate from say Japanese to English and have it be useful then you better be a good mechanic.

3 Likes
74

I am not an expert on elements but is it really possible that in jhana those four elements find no footing?
The reasoning of Sujato i do not understand. Can you explain this? For example, can there be a cognition without these four elements?

Can you also explain what really is seen while in a state called infinite vinnana?

1 Like
75

I don’t know if this will make sense, I would state it thus,

What truth does all the ‘wise’ become aware of?
That of the ‘citta’.

But it does not matter how seemingly unshakable, untouchable the Citta has become, it comes under the Dukkha Sacca.

Alternatively I could say, they are all citta-patisamvedi(more or less). But who is truly citta-patisamvedi is one who has discerned this Citta to be aniccato dukkhato rogato gaṇḍato sallato aghato ābādhato parato palokato suññato anattato etc. But I don’t think that is tuppenny hapenny task.

1 Like
76

I just want to add that the philosophical minded also become citta-patisamvedi(somewhat). But in my opinion, they are like one who stands in the door way, neither outside nor inside. Also gets in other people’s way :wink:.

1 Like
77

@Green

I am not an expert on elements but is it really possible that in jhana those four elements find no footing?

At the risk of being controversial, I will say that the Thai forest tradition teachers explain that, when Jhana is achieved, the mind enters the Bhavanga. This is purely a mental state. Physical elements have been temporarily abandoned and play no part in the experience. There is, of course, consciousness.

1 Like
78

Thanks, i am gonna search their teachings on ‘bhavanga’ and see what they write about is.

The only thing i can say about it is that i believe that even in deep dreamless sleep there is a kind of knowing, how can we otherwise look at this as happiness, or as something we like and are attracted to?
And i am also quit sure vinnana is just a very small part of our lives and knowing. There is much more knowing going on in the mind besides what becomes clearly aware. I believe that it was Jung who compared this wih an iceberg. The knowing of vinnana is like the top of the iceberg. Very much information from within our body and from the outside world never becomes aware but is still registered in some way. So, the equate knowing with vinnana to me seems a mistake.

1 Like
79

Deep sleep is also a state of Bhavanga. Jhana differs because the mode of entry into the Bhavanga. To be Jhana, entry must be by developing the factors of Jhana. This is not done in the case of sleep.

2 Likes
80

For a worldly person all the formless attainments are fabricated - so by definition each one provides a ‘footing’ for consciousness - a place where it can establish itself. I think why the form elements find no footing is because as long as consciousness in bound up with the sense of infinite space, sense of infinite consciousness and so on - then it won’t be attending to the form properties - although as I recall space is one of the primary form properties in some suttas. So a bit confusing.

1 Like