Other than Sankata and Asankata

Q & A
26

I want to explain the detailed meaning of this.

By default people think of ‘everything’ as a single category of things.

Eternalist thinks the category of everything is a classification of all things which are mind-made constructs, they think that mind makes world and can be without the world.

Annihilationist thinks everything is essentially a classification of the universe, the world, nature, and mind that is made therein, and that the world can be without it too.

For both of this

Everything = Reality (either the mind or the universe)

Ariya say that mind & world are dependently originated and not otherwise.

The discernment of a mind requires the discernment of a world and the discernment of a world requires the discernment of a mind.

This duality is on one side.
Asankhata is on the other side.

Therefore for the ariyan
Everything breaks up into two categories of discernable Reality

Category1 - Reality which is of mind & world
Category 2 - Reality where neither this world nor another

Therefore to them there is also that which is described as reality & everything which the puthujjana misunderstands but there is also an analogical category of reality delineated & divorced from the former.

So one gets two categories of principial reality, one which changes and one which doesn’t.

And this is not eternalism because the eternalist thinks there is only one pricipial reality which having been changing becomes stable & doesn’t change anymore.

And this is not annhilationism because the annihilationist thinks there is only one principial reality wherein the absence of something that was is stable & doesn’t change.

27

Certainly, asankhata dhatu, is not dependently arisen, but it is a mistake to say it arises. To arise and to have a begining are the same things.

1 Like
28

This seems an interesting point, and perhaps one tangled up in language…
Isn’t it correct that for one experiencing stream-entry, a mind-moment arises that is an experience of nibbana, a ‘taste’ of nibbana?

If so, wouldn’t this citta’s occurrence be dependent on many things?
Yet it is an ‘experience’ of something unconditioned. But, that ‘something’ is, at least in a way, a nothing at least from conditioned experience.

29

Certainly

It depends on what you mean by correct.

This expression is based on commentary method, hence you speak of mind-moments.

Therefore

It can be correct in meaning or expression when cross referenced with the commentary.

It can be correct in meaning or expression when cross referenced with the sutta.

It can be correct in meaning or expression when cross referenced with the the doctrine of any one person.

30

Thinking of Anguttara 3.55…

Kittāvatā nu kho, bho gotama, sandiṭṭhikaṁ nibbānaṁ hoti akālikaṁ ehipassikaṁ opaneyyikaṁ paccattaṁ veditabbaṁ viññūhī”ti?

….

Yato kho ayaṁ, brāhmaṇa, anavasesaṁ rāgakkhayaṁ paṭisaṁvedeti, anavasesaṁ dosakkhayaṁ paṭisaṁvedeti, anavasesaṁ mohakkhayaṁ paṭisaṁvedeti,
evaṁ kho, brāhmaṇa, sandiṭṭhikaṁ nibbānaṁ hoti akālikaṁ ehipassikaṁ opaneyyikaṁ paccattaṁ veditabbaṁ viññūhī”ti.

Of course, for a stream-enterer, raga dosa and moha will creep back…

31

It seems like many of my responses to this thread have been flagged and removed by the mods while the seriously off-topic posts by Notez remain. I don’t think this is fair.

32

It’s not off-topic to explain the text in question & it’s implications in light of EBT, and as it differs from the contradicting views of annihilation & eternalism held by the puthujjhana.

The two categoriies i explained, how these are misunderstood i explained and how to understand them i explained.

This is not only exactly on topic but also very important to anyone aspiring to be skilled in elements.

You are welcome to explain it as well if it’s in your range.

If you want me to remove something which is clearly irrelevant to public interest i will modify it myself. You can pm me and we can edit it closer to your liking.

33

Asankhata dhatu does not depend on anything. But ignorance of it is dependently arisen on certain conditions. So we are entitled to speak about arising of knowledge, but while our knowledge as stream enterers is new, it is knowledge about something which can be described only negatively as non-arising, non-disappearing and non-changing of what is present.

1 Like
34

The knowledge of non-arising arises depending on conditions. :grinning:

35

Nobody said that samsara has no humorous aspects. Eightfold noble path is conditional, but it leads to what isn’t conditional.

In fact I would describe it rather as paradoxical, not humorous, and the paradox is rather crude, on gross verbal level since when we start practicing Dhamma, what we have at our disposition? Only sankhata dhammas. So on existential level it is obviousness.

1 Like
36

Yes, perhaps you mean that we need to rely on ordinary, conventional language to express something that is way beyond ordinary experience, and all language is rooted in the conventional conditioned world, inherently unsatisfactory.