Proof: Dharma is Buddha's Teaching, not "mental qualities"

In general, there are two classes of dhamma in the EBT.
We'll use Upper case 'D' and lowercase 'd' to differentiate.

Dharma/Dhamma  = Buddha's teaching,  that leads to nibbida, viraga, nirodha ... nirvana.
dharma/dhamma = qualities/mental objects/thing/phenomena.

AN 7.83 How to verify Dhamma-vinaya is Buddha’s word

ye ca kho tvaṃ, upāli,	“Upali,
dhamme jāneyyāsi —	“As for the Dharmas of which you may know,
‘ime dhammā	‘These Dharmas {lead}
ekanta-nibbidāya	to utter disenchantment,
virāgāya	to dispassion,
nirodhāya	to cessation,
upasamāya	to calm,
abhiññāya	to direct knowledge,
sambodhāya	to self-awakening,
nibbānāya	nor to Nirvana’:
saṃvattantī’ti;	(they) lead (to that)’;
ekaṃsena, upāli, dhāreyyāsi —	You may categorically hold,
‘eso dhammo	‘This is the Dhamma,
eso vinayo	this is the Vinaya,
etaṃ satthu-sāsanan’”ti.	this is the Teacher’s-instruction.’”

SN 56.31 handful of rosewood leaves

(The word ‘Dhamma’ not explicitly used in this sutta, but 4nt  (which is unnamed Dharma) is the handful of leaves that leads to nibbida, viraga, … nirvana is the same as definition of ‘Dharma’ that occurs in numerous EBT suttas such as the one above).

“Taṃ kiṃ maññatha, bhikkhave,	“What do you think, monks?
katamaṃ nu kho bahutaraṃ—	Which is more:
yāni vā mayā parittāni sīsapāpaṇṇāni pāṇinā gahitāni yadidaṃ upari sīsapāvane”ti?	the few leaves in my hand, or those in the forest above me?”
“Appamattakāni, bhante, bhagavatā parittāni sīsapāpaṇṇāni pāṇinā gahitāni;	“Sir, the few leaves in your hand are a tiny amount.
atha kho etāneva bahutarāni yadidaṃ upari sīsapāvane”ti.	There are far more leaves in the forest above.”
“Evameva kho, bhikkhave, etadeva bahutaraṃ yaṃ vo mayā abhiññāya anakkhātaṃ.	“In the same way, there is much more that I have directly known but have not explained to you. What I have explained is a tiny amount.
Kasmā cetaṃ, bhikkhave, mayā anakkhātaṃ?	And why haven’t I explained it?
Na hetaṃ, bhikkhave, atthasaṃhitaṃ nādibrahmacariyakaṃ na nibbidāya na virāgāya na nirodhāya na upasamāya na abhiññāya na sambodhāya na nibbānāya saṃvattati;	Because it’s not beneficial or relevant to the fundamentals of the spiritual life. It doesn’t lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, peace, insight, awakening, and nirvana.
tasmā taṃ mayā anakkhātaṃ.	That’s why I haven’t explained it.
Kiñca, bhikkhave, mayā akkhātaṃ?	And what have I explained?
‘Idaṃ dukkhan’ti, bhikkhave, mayā akkhātaṃ, ‘ayaṃ dukkhasamudayo’ti mayā akkhātaṃ, ‘ayaṃ dukkhanirodho’ti mayā akkhātaṃ, ‘ayaṃ dukkhanirodhagāminī paṭipadā’ti mayā akkhātaṃ.	I have explained: ‘This is suffering’ … ‘This is the origin of suffering’ … ‘This is the cessation of suffering’ … ‘This is the practice that leads to the cessation of suffering’.

Proof

In the standard right effort formula (leaving Dhamma untranslated)

STED 4pd🏹 (in full)

“katamo ca, bhikkhave, sammā-vāyāmo?

What **, *********, is right-effort?

An-uppannānaṃ pāpakānaṃ a-kusalānaṃ dhammānaṃ…	Not-yet-arisen evil, un-skillful ☸Dhamma-[teachings]…
uppannānaṃ pāpakānaṃ a-kusalānaṃ dhammānaṃ…	arisen evil, un-skillful ☸Dhamma-[teachings]…
An-uppannānaṃ kusalānaṃ dhammānaṃ…	Not-yet-arisen skillful ☸Dhamma-[teachings]…
uppannānaṃ kusalānaṃ dhammānaṃ …	arisen skillful ☸Dhamma-[teachings]…
chandaṃ janeti vāyamati vīriyaṃ ārabhati cittaṃ paggaṇhāti padahati,	desire (he) generates! (he) endeavors! Vigor & vitality (he) arouses! (the) mind (he) pushes, exerts!

B. Bodhi and B. Thanissaro translate Dhamma there as "qualities".
Here's the problem (in mathematical terms).

Let d =  kusala dhamma, the set containing all skillful & wholesome qualities.
Let D = kusala ☸Dhamma-[teachings], the set containing all ☸Dhamma-[teachings] that lead to AN 7.83's "nibbida, viraga, nirodha... nirvana".

D is a subset of d.
But d is not equivalent to D, and 'd' is not a subset of D.

D is the handful of leaves of SN 56.31 that is directly relevant to realizing Nirvana.
d contains many skillful qualities that have nothing to do with Nirvana.
Examples:

1. "the proper way to hold one's pinky while having tea with the queen of England"
2. "how to rob a bank without getting caught". That is a 'skillful quality' in a general context.
3. "patience is a virtue"
4. "loving and caring for ones parents and children"

#2 exposes a different problem in  B. Thanissaro's "dhamma = qualities" translation, it doesn't adequately address sila, moral and ethical dimensions of dhamma.

But #3 and #4 are examples of the kinds of 'skillful qualities' that will lead to a happy life, and likely rebirth in the deva realms, but not eradication of dukkha, and realization of Nirvana.

right effort, samma vayamo, the 'right' means it needs to lead to complete eradication of Dukkha.

Therefore, dhamma as 'qualities' is too loose of a constraint. Right effort is only concerned about ☸Dhamma-[teachings], and  ☸Dhamma-[teaching] automatically includes the dhamma-qualities that it needs to do its job.

The Buddha only cared about the handful of leaves, the ☸Dharma that leads to nirvana, not the entire forest of leaves containing dhamma 'qualities' that lead to heavenly rebirth and continued infinite rebirthing in samsara and Dukkha.

QED.

Response to questions

Re: Proof: Dharma is Buddha's Teaching, not "mental qualities"

• Edit
• Delete post
• Report this post
• Quote

Post by frank k » Sun Jul 21, 2019 2:10 am

Dinsdale wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 21, 2019 12:47 am

Sorry but I don't get your argument with the factors of Right Effort. How can unskillful qualities (dhamma) be the same as dhamma teachings or dhammic principles (Dhamma)? Why not just accept that there are two different meanings of "dhamma"? 

There are two problems here that are separate but relevant. 'dhamma' needs to remain untranslated, or consistently translated with a single term consistently everywhere. In the Chinese Agamas, the Chinese translators had the foresight to do this (they translate it dhamma as 'fa', everywhere). I've dealt with that topic on other threads. In the pali world, B. Analayo does this, or has started doing it in his more recent work.

The second problem, which you're not seeing, is kusala dhamma 'qualities', under right effort (among other places), is coherent and makes sense on its own, but right effort is 'right' only if it leads to nirvana.

example:
metta development is a kusala dhamma, everyone can agree on this correct?
following the instructions of right effort, we should develop unarisen kusala dhammas like metta, and
continue to protect metta that has already arisen.

But if you only develop metta as a kusala dhamma (quality/state), and not understand that quality within Dhamma-[teachings] (that leads to viraga...nirvana),
then metta only takes you to a brahma realm or deva rebirth. It doesn't lead you to nirvana.

Therefore, right effort must work with kusala Dhamma, not kusala dhamma (qualities).

Otherwise you would have to show us where in the EBT it's filtering kusala dhammas into the Dhammas.
It's not in B. Thanissaro's adn B. Bodhi's Dhamma-vicaya-sambojjhanga, or Dhamma-anupassana (they also translate Dhamma there has dhamma 'qualities/states/phenomena').

metta straddles many senses of Dhamma, which is why 'dhamma' must remain untranslated.
metta = ☸Dhamma [buddha's teaching]
metta = Dhamma [a wholesome teaching taught by other religions]
metta = dhamma [a skillful quality]
metta = Dhamma [a natural law of karma that being nice to other people, will cause a chain reaction of positive cause/effect sequence that will have nice things happen to you, as a result of initiating a nice cause].