Skip to main content

šŸ”—šŸ“KN Ud 1.10 bahiya sutta notes

 

SC discussion thread: https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/bahiya-revisited/14199/13


This post is nice, shows upanishad connection to  "seen, heard, thought, cognized" 


Dhammawheel: Re: Anatta thread

Post by ancientbuddhism » Fri Sep 25, 2015 12:44 am
Another comparison with the phrase diį¹­į¹­haį¹ƒ, sutaį¹ƒ, mutaį¹ƒ, viƱƱātaį¹ƒ in the Nikāyas, to the dį¹›į¹£į¹­e, śrute, mate, vijƱāte in the Upaniį¹£ads, is in the Kāįø·akārāma Sutta of Aį¹…guttara Nikāya (4.24), with reference to Bį¹›hadāraį¹‡yaka Upaniį¹£ad III.8.11.

In this Upaniį¹£ad the epithet for the Ātman is ‘Imperishable’ (akį¹£aram), of which…

”…is unseen but is the seer, is unheard but is the hearer, unthought but is the thinker, unknown but is the knower. There is no other seer but this, there is no other hearer but this, there is no other thinker but this, there is no other knower but this.” [S. Radhakrishnan]

…tad vā etad akį¹£araį¹ƒ gārgy adį¹›į¹£į¹­aį¹ƒ draį¹£į¹­į¹›, aśrutaį¹ƒ śrotį¹›, amataį¹ƒ mantį¹›, avijƱātaį¹ƒ vijƱātį¹›, nānyad ato ‘sti draį¹£į¹­į¹›, nānyad ato ‘sti śrotį¹›, nānyad ato ‘sti mantį¹›,nānyad ato ‘sti vijƱātį¹›We find this echoed in the Kāįø·akārāma Sutta where we read that for a Tathāgata, there are no imaginings (maƱƱati) of a possessor of these, because a Tathāgata abides in the quality of ‘suchness’ (tādÄ«); a distillate quality of direct contemplative knowing:

”Thus it is, bhikkhus, when the Tathāgata sees what is to be seen; he does not imagine the seen, does not imagine the not-seen, does not imagine what is to be seen, and does not imagine a seer. When hearing what is to be heard; does not imagine the heard, does not imagine the not-heard, does not imagine what is to be heard, and does not imagine a hearer. When thinking what is to be thought; does not imagine the thought, does not imagine the not-thought, does not imagine what is to be thought, and does not imagine a thinker. When cognizing what is to be cognized; does not imagine the cognized, does not imagine the not-cognized, does not imagine what is to be cognized, and does not imagine a cognizer.

“ti kho, bhikkhave, tathāgato daį¹­į¹­hā daį¹­į¹­habbaį¹ƒ, diį¹­į¹­haį¹ƒ na maƱƱati, adiį¹­į¹­haį¹ƒ na maƱƱati, daį¹­į¹­habbaį¹ƒ na maƱƱati, daį¹­į¹­hāraį¹ƒ na maƱƱati; sutvā sotabbaį¹ƒ, sutaį¹ƒ na maƱƱati, asutaį¹ƒ na maƱƱati, sotabbaį¹ƒ na maƱƱati, sotāraį¹ƒ na maƱƱati; mutvā motabbaį¹ƒ, mutaį¹ƒ na maƱƱati, amutaį¹ƒ na maƱƱati, motabbaį¹ƒ na maƱƱati, motāraį¹ƒ na maƱƱati; viƱƱatvā viƱƱātabbaį¹ƒ, viƱƱātaį¹ƒ na maƱƱati, aviƱƱātaį¹ƒ na maƱƱati, viƱƱātabbaį¹ƒ na maƱƱati, viƱƱātāraį¹ƒ na maƱƱati.

“Thus it is, bhikkhus, being just such with the nature of what is to be seen, heard, thought, and cognized; the Tathāgata is such. And I say that of this such, not another such can be brought forth that surpasses it.

Iti kho, bhikkhave, tathāgato diį¹­į¹­hasutamutaviƱƱātabbesu dhammesu tādÄ«yeva tādÄ«. Tamhā ca pana tādimhā aƱƱo tādÄ« uttaritaro vā paį¹‡Ä«tataro vā natthÄ«ti vadāmÄ«’ti.
We should also make a comparison of this with the Bāhiya Sutta of Udāna 1.10, with reference to the state of being ‘merely’ (mattaį¹ƒ) present with these, also with no possessor to be found.

”When, Bāhiya, the seen shall be merely the seen, the heard shall be merely the heard, the thought shall be merely the thought, and the cognized shall be merely the cognized; just so, Bāhiya, you will not be there. When, Bāhiya, you are not there; just so, Bāhiya, you will not be in that condition. When, Bāhiya, you are not in that condition; just so, Bāhiya, you will not be of that condition, nor in another, nor between the two. Just this is the release of dissatisfaction.”

‘Yato kho te Bāhiya, diį¹­į¹­he diį¹­į¹­hamattaį¹ƒ bhavissati, sute sutamattaį¹ƒ bhavissati, mute mutamattaį¹ƒ bhavissati, viƱƱāte viƱƱātamattaį¹ƒ bhavissati; tato tvaį¹ƒ Bāhiya na tena, yato tvaį¹ƒ Bāhiya na tena, tato tvaį¹ƒ Bāhiya na tattha, yato tvaį¹ƒ Bāhiya na tattha, tato tvaį¹ƒ Bāhiya nevidha, na huraį¹ƒ, na ubhayam-antare, esevanto dukkhassā.’ – Udāna 1.10

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Advice to younger meditators on jhāna, sex, porn, masturbation

Someone asked: Is porn considered harmful sexual.activity? I don't have a sex life because I don't have a partner and I don't wish to engage in casual sex so I use porn to quench the biological urge to orgasm. I can't see that's it's harmful because nobody is being forced into it. The actors are all paid well and claim to enjoy it etc. The only harm I can see is that it's so accessible these days on smart devices and so children may access it but I believe that this is the parents responsibility to not allow unsupervised use of devices etc. Views? Frankk response: In another thread, you asked about pleasant sensations and jhāna.  I'm guessing you're young, so here's some important advice you won't get from suttas   if you're serious about jhāna.  (since monastics are already celibate by rule)   If you want to attain stable and higher jhānas,   celibacy and noble silence to the best of your ability are the feedstock and prerequiste to tha
Post a Comment
Read more

SN 48.40 Ven. Thanissaro comments on Ven. Sunyo's analysis

This was Ven. Sunyo's analysis of SN 48.40: https://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/2024/05/exciting-news-honest-ebt-scholars-like.html And here is Ven. Thanissaro's response to that analysis: I think there’s a better way to tackle the issue of SN 48:40 than by appealing to the oldest layers of commentarial literature. That way is to point out that SN 48:40, as we have it, doesn’t pass the test in DN 16 for determining what’s genuine Dhamma and what’s not. There the standard is, not the authority of the person who’s claiming to report the Buddha’s teachings, but whether the teachings he’s reporting are actually in accordance with the principles of the Dhamma that you know. So the simple fact that those who have passed the Buddha’s teachings down to us say that a particular passage is what the Buddha actually taught is not sufficient grounds for accepting it. In the case of the jhānas—the point at issue here— we have to take as our guide the standard formula for the jhānas, a
Post a Comment
Read more

1min. video: Dalai Lama kissing boy and asking him to suck his tongue

To give more context, this is a public event,  * everyone knows cameras are rolling  *  it's a room full of children * the boy's mom is standing off camera a few feet away watching all of this * the boy initiated contact, he had already had a hug with Dalai Lama earlier and then asked Dalai Lama for another hug which triggered this segment  17 min. video showing what happened before that 1 min. clip and after, with some explanation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bT0qey5Ts78 16min talk from Ajahn Acalo with his thoughts on Dalai Lama kissing boy, relevance to Bhikkhu monastic code, sexual predators in religion in general, and how celibate monastics deal with sexual energy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK2m0TcUib0 The child's comments about the incident in a filmed interview later https://www.marca.com/en/lifestyle/world-news/2023/04/18/643eba5d46163ffc078b457c.html The child: It's a great experience It was amazing to meet His Holiness and I think it's a great ex
Post a Comment
Read more