Sunday, April 30, 2023

why do monks eat more than one meal a day?


Re: why do monks eat more than one meal a day?

Post by frank k » 

why do monks eat more than one meal a day?
The OP's misunderstanding about arahants eating more than one meal per day has already been answered in the thread.
But as to the question of the thread title,
I invite you all to really try to answer it for yourself, through your own experience.

In other words, rather than asking "why do monks...",
you should be asking yourself, "Why do ** I ** eat more than one meal a day?"

If you're not sure, then this will help you.
I've collected relevant passages from suttas, and thai forest masters:
https://lucid24.org/tped/g/goldcraft/index.html#3.1.1

 

🔗📝 collection of notes on MN 61

 


MN 61, question about asymmetry of bad mental action in matrix



Friday, April 28, 2023

My thoughts on Dalai Lama kissing boy, and the solution

HHDL = His holiness, the Dalai Lama

I've collected good references here, including the actual video, and snippets from forums discussions containing valid critcism and explanations of cultural context, and most importantly, what the rules of the actual vinaya that buddhist monks are supposed to follow:

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


At the time of this writing, HHDL is about 88 years old.
He has an exemplary record devoting his life to compassionate service to all living beings,  as a Tibetan Buddhist monk.
In this age of 'me too',  everyone with a cell phone with high resolution cameras, and the ability to quickly publicize any indiscretion or sexual crime, we've seen sexual predators in positions of power being exposed and convicted.

Leaders of large corporations,  governments, professional sports, doctors, leaders in all religions.

Tibetan Buddhism has an especially poor track record with corrupt sexual predators.

If HHDL had any legitimate sexual offenses over his 88 years, I don't believe it could remain covered up this long, in today's climate. 

Regarding the recent incident where HHDL kissed a young boy publicly, on camera, and asked him to suck his tongue.
I looked carefully at the explanations of cultural context, including the "eat my tongue" (tibetan che la sa), and it seems HHDL was not doing anything out of the ordinary from what a Tibetan grandfather would do to his grandson or granddaughter.

Europeans, strangers,  kiss each other on the cheek upon greeting.
Italian fathers and grandfathers kiss their young sons and grandsons in the mouth.
Are they also sexual predators, or homosexuals?
Cultural context matters.

Based on all evidence, HHDL is not guilty of any crime.

The real problem

The real problem is HHDL, Tibetan Buddhism and much of Mahayana Buddhism don't strictly follow the Buddha's  250 (approx.) vinaya rules, which would prevent physical contact such as hugging and kissing between members of the opposite sex in the first place.

The Buddha knew what he was doing.

It's not good enough that monastics have pure motive free of lust, they also have to behave publicly in a way that frees them from suspicion of lustful intent.
That's what the rules are there for.
Monks are not supposed to even hug their moms in public, because it's a bad look. People who see that don't know it's their mom.

Tibetan Buddhism, Vajrayana, Mahayana circumvent the Buddha's rules by conveniently having an overriding set of Bodhisattva vows 

Basically, whenever they feel like it, they can use "skillful means" to justify hugging and kissing "out of compassion", becuase the 'bodhisattva vows' are a superior path (supposedly), and can override the 250 vinaya rules whenever they're inconvenient (to one's greed, anger, and lust). 

Conclusion

So the fix is simple.
Buddhist monks and nuns, whether Theravada, Mahayana, Vajrayana,  should follow the 250+ rules of the vinaya, and the Bodhisattva vows should be subservient to the vinaya, not a loophole to do whatever you want whenever you want.


Also important:

I believe all parents should be careful and never assume leaving their kids alone with any adult, no matter how trustworthy they are, is safe. 




 





Thursday, April 27, 2023

SN 24 sota-patti (chapter on stream enterer), this is why ariya-savaka is just a disciple, not necessarily already a "noble disciple"


this is why ariya-savaka is just a disciple (who may or may not already be ariya), not already a confirmed "noble disciple"


The first 18 suttas in SN 24, which is a chapter in SN all about how stream entry happens.

They all end the same way, with this refrain, after 18 different kinds of wrong view have been given up:


I'll show Sujato's translation first (which is wrong):

“When a noble disciple has given up doubt in these six cases, and has given up doubt in suffering, its origin, its cessation, and the practice that leads to its cessation,“Yato kho, bhikkhave, ariyasāvakassa imesu ca ṭhānesu kaṅkhā pahīnā hoti, dukkhepissa kaṅkhā pahīnā hoti …pe… dukkhanirodhagāminiyā paṭipadāyapissa kaṅkhā pahīnā hotithey’re called a noble disciple who is a stream-enterer, not liable to be reborn in the underworld, bound for awakening.”ayaṁ vuccati, bhikkhave, ariyasāvako sotāpanno avinipātadhammo niyato sambodhiparāyano”ti.


But by definition, a noble disciple is already at least a stream enterer, with none of those doubts that are shown being given up. 

Therefore ariya-savaka is just a disciple of the noble ones, not necessarily already a noble one themself. 


And my corrected version of his translation:

“Yampidaṃ diṭṭhaṃ sutaṃ mutaṃ viññātaṃ pattaṃ pariyesitaṃ anuvicaritaṃ manasā tampi niccaṃ vā aniccaṃ vā”ti?
“That which is seen, heard, thought, cognized, searched, and explored by the mind: is that permanent or impermanent?”
“Aniccaṃ, bhante”.
“Impermanent, sir.”
“Yaṃ panāniccaṃ dukkhaṃ vā taṃ sukhaṃ vā”ti?
“But if it’s impermanent, is it suffering or happiness?”
“Dukkhaṃ, bhante”.
“Suffering, sir.”
“Yaṃ panāniccaṃ dukkhaṃ vipariṇāmadhammaṃ, api nu taṃ anupādāya evaṃ diṭṭhi uppajjeyya:
“But by not grasping what’s impermanent, suffering, and perishable, would the view arise:
‘etaṃ mama, esohamasmi, eso me attā’”ti?
‘This is mine, I am this, this is my self’?”
“No hetaṃ, bhante”.
“No, sir.”
“Yato kho, bhikkhave, ariyasāvakassa imesu ca ṭhānesu kaṅkhā pahīnā hoti, dukkhepissa kaṅkhā pahīnā hoti … pe … dukkhanirodhagāminiyā paṭipadāyapissa kaṅkhā pahīnā hoti—
“When a noble-one's-disciple has given up doubt in these six cases, and has given up doubt in suffering, its origin, its cessation, and the practice that leads to its cessation,
ayaṃ vuccati, bhikkhave, ariyasāvako sotāpanno avinipātadhammo niyato sambodhiparāyano”ti.
they’re called a noble-one's-disciple who is a stream-enterer, not liable to be reborn in the underworld, bound for awakening.”


Forum discussion


Mumfie wrote: Thu Apr 27, 2023 5:08 am
frank k wrote: Thu Apr 27, 2023 2:44 amWhen a noble-one's-disciple has given up doubt in these six cases...
Any reason for the preference for an indefinite article?

Such an article would imply that anyone who is a disciple of any ariyan teacher is a sāvaka (or sāvikā if it's a woman) of that ariyan. But that isn't how the word sāvaka is used.

Suppose a man gets ordained as a bhikkhu with Mahākassapa as his upajjhaya and Moggallāna and Ānanda as the two ācariyas. After his ordination he will be described as a saddhivihārika of Mahākassapa and an antevāsika of Moggallāna and/or Ānanda. But you won't find him described as a "sāvaka" of any of these three. The only person a Buddhist is a sāvaka of is the Buddha.

That being so, when the word ariyasāvaka is being used to designate those who are either not, or not necessarily, ariyans, better renderings of the compound would be either as a genitive singular with a definite article: "disciple of the Noble One" (i.e., the Buddha).

Or a genitive plural: "disciple of the noble ones".

Because my script which does a first pass fix of Sujato's translations, from which lucid24.org are based, uses simple search and replace.
I believe "disciple of noble ones" or "the-noble-one's-disciple" would have messed up (grammar in sentence) in some cases (where sujato uses "noble disciple" everywhere).
Also, "noble-one's-disciple" stands out more clearly IMO that a correction has been made to readers who are used to seeing the pervasive wrong translation "noble disciple".

I will make a point to fix it at some point in the future when I have the time to do more detailed hand editing and not just script based search and replace.


ssasny wrote: Thu Apr 27, 2023 3:14 pmYes, literally ‘one who has heard. ‘

From the PED:

Sāvaka [fr. śru] a hearer, disciple (never an Arahant)

This word is sometimes contrasted with ‘samana’, often translated as ‘ascetic’ -i.e. a serious practitioner not following the Buddha’s teaching.

samaṇa does refer to buddhist monks in many places, and even to the buddha.
samaṇa 1
masc. ascetic; renunciant; holy man; monk; recluse; lit. who makes an effort; calm one [√sam + aṇa] ✓
grammarexamplesdeclensionroot familycompound familyfrequencyfeedback
samaṇa 2
masc. Ascetic; epithet of the Buddha [√sam + aṇa] ✓

Kind of strange 'Sāvaka' never refers to an arahant (according to PED).
I don't know if I believe that.


by Mumfie » 

frank k wrote: Fri Apr 28, 2023 4:28 amKind of strange 'Sāvaka' never refers to an arahant (according to PED).
I don't know if I believe that.
It's a bizarre claim, especially considering that later in the very same entry the compiler correctly notes that sāvakasangha includes all eight grades of ariyan.

Perhaps he saw a commentarial gloss like this one:
Bhagavato pana sāvako ti sotāpanna-sakadāgāmi-anāgāmīnaṃ aññataro.

Disciple of the Blessed One means a certain one out of stream-entrants, once-returners and non-returners.
(Commentary to AN3.116)
And then misconstrued it as a general definition, when in fact it's only applicable to the sutta in question.



notes on vicara, vicāra, and near synonynms (anu-vicara, upa-vicara, etc.)

Internal

4👑☸ → EBpedia📚 → vicara , vicāra




External


AN 4.199 Sujato's translation of vicāra here, compared to Ṭhānissaro



Thursday, April 20, 2023

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



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 experience to meet someone with so much positive energy," said the boy, who had a few minutes meeting with the Tibetan leader.

"It's a really nice feeling to meet him and you get a lot of that positive energy.

"Not just like that, but once you get the positive energy I think you're happier and it's a better thing, you smile a lot more."

video of boy giving interview:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCMK7zhQ2HQ


Dalai Lama apologises after viral video of him kissing a child: It was innocent and playful


https://www.marca.com/en/lifestyle/world-news/2023/04/10/64341f9222601d882f8b45a9.html

World News

Dalai Lama apologises after viral video of him kissing a child: It was innocent and playful


The young boy resisted kissing him on the mouth

Dalai Lama apologises after viral video of him kissing a child



The Dalai Lama has had to issue an apology after a video went viral on all social media last weekend, which showed the moment where the Dalai Lama, spiritual leader of Tibetan Buddhism, was seen kissing a minor on the mouth and then asking him to 'suck his tongue'.


Following the scandal, the office of the leader of Lamaism issued a statement apologising and explaining the whole situation.

Video thumbnail

Dalai Lama kisses a young Indian boy, tells him 'suck my tongue'


The Dalai Lama's office said: "His holiness wishes to apologise to the boy and his family as well as his many friends across the world, for the hurt his words may have caused.


"His holiness often teases people he meets in an innocent and playful way, even in public and before cameras. He regrets the incident."


The event was in February, but the images and video circulated on social media last weekend, trending and platforms such as Twitter were filled with protests and messages of disgust at what they were seeing.


The child approached the Dalai Lama and asked if he could hug him, so the leader invited him on stage, showed him his cheek, and invited him to give him a kiss: "First here".


The Dalai Lama kept hold of the boy, saying "I think here also" and then placing a kiss on his lips. "And suck my tongue," the Dalai Lama then said, sticking out his tongue, forehead to forehead with the student.

"Such cultural expressions are not acceptable".


The M3M Foundation, a philanthropic part of the Indian real estate company M3M Group, based in Dharamshala, India, where the Dalai Lama lives in exile, told CNN media outlet its condemnation of "all forms of child abuse".


"Some news reports refer to Tibetan culture about showing language, but this video is certainly not about any cultural expression, and even if it is, such cultural expressions are not acceptable," they said.


"The world looks up to religious leaders to take a stand and lead against the exploitation and abuse of children through their actions and words," M3M concluded.


My thoughts (frankk)


I believe all parents should be careful and never assume leaving their kids alone with any adult, no matter how trustworthy they are, is safe. 




Related articles

A Buddhist monk (Dalai lama) hugging an American nun.



Forum discussion



Re: Dalai Lama kisses boy and asks him to 'suck his tongue'
Post by BrokenBones » Mon Apr 10, 2023 4:31 pm
The video does not surprise me in the least. A religion that regards sensuality & sexual practices as a means to enlightenment (transformed obviously ) is going to be riddled with deviancy... from top to bottom.

I feel sorry for the good people in the middle... led astray by romanticism and Dhamma teachings which merely act as a veneer to the rotten core.

My personal opinion is that there may well be the odd enlightened person in the tradition... but that would be despite the tradition not because of it... it does actually incorporate a lot of Dhamma even if that Dhamma is given second billing and is routinely corrupted.




Re: Dalai Lama kisses boy and asks him to 'suck his tongue'
Post by BrokenBones » Tue Apr 11, 2023 12:53 am

Akusala wrote: Mon Apr 10, 2023 11:40 pmThere is a subtle difference between someone giving someone else the benefit of the doubt and someone being an apologist of someone else's behaviour. You cannot seem to discern the difference.

If you want an example of an apologist, here what it is like:

The benefit of doubt only applies when something is doubtful. The video is there for all to see.

The only possibly doubtful thing is motive; but in the context of a Buddhist' monk, that is almost irrelevant. More relevant is how the wider public perceives the interaction, the sangha and in this instance a monk who for many is viewed as the Buddhist Pope.

It will be a stick that Buddhists of all traditions will be beaten with for a good many years.

It should really wipe away the erroneous view that the DL is an advanced spiritual person. The fake news we've been spoon fed for many years is exemplified in the romanticised reporting of Tibetan Buddhism for over a century.

The Tibetan people have had an awful time and many of the Tibetan religious hierarchy have used that for their own ends... this one act caught on video offers a clear insight into the adhammic nature of Tibetan Buddhism.


Pali-English dictionary
[«previous (A) next»] — Adhamma in Pali glossary
Source: BuddhaSasana: Concise Pali-English Dictionary
adhamma : (m.) 1. misconduct; 2. false doctrine.

Don't forget... the DL is THE main man and is above all others in their tradition. If this is how the top man behaves, it begs the question... what of the lesser lamas?

...

It's not too much off topic but the DL wasn't too vocal regarding Sogyal Rinpoche.

The DL has a long history of endorsing lamas despite their well known deviancies. When pressed he obfuscates and when it becomes widespread public knowledge he claims to have known nothing.

It's all well documented and I'm surprised you know nothing about it.

The video is a tough one for all apologists... they want the public to disbelieve their own eyes & ears and put it down to cultural differences.

Are you sure you're not 'seeing everything though a veil of delusion, confusion, conditioning and personal bias?'

Are you 'projecting the garbage in your own mind onto the outside world?'

The video shows a serious breach of Vinaya and there's no getting round that.





Re: Dalai Lama kisses boy and asks him to 'suck his tongue'
Post by Mumfie » Tue Apr 11, 2023 7:52 am

BrokenBones wrote: Tue Apr 11, 2023 2:55 amThe video shows a serious breach of Vinaya and there's no getting round that.

It doesn't. However scandalous it might look, what the video shows is either a non-offence or a misdemeanor (dukkata).

The Vinaya rulings in connection with the second saṅghādisesa rule are:

Touching a female human (of any age) with lust: saṅghādisesa. This is a serious offence.

Touching a female human intentionally but without lust: dukkata. This is a light offence.

Touching a female human unintentionally: no offence.

Touching a male human with lust: dukkata.

Touching a male human without lust: no offence.

https://suttacentral.net/pli-tv-bu-vb-ss2/en/brahmali

...
mumfie:
The Tibetan Vinaya does have that rule, many others as well - 253 precepts for fully ordained monks, 36 for novice monks and nuns.
All extant recensions of the Vinaya have the second saṅghādisesa / saṅghavaśesa rule (concerning physical contact), including the Mūlasarvāstivādin Vinaya of Tibet. It's just that the Tibetans don't generally observe it very strictly.





Re: Dalai Lama kisses boy and asks him to 'suck his tongue'
Post by Mystik » Tue Apr 11, 2023 5:19 pm
For those caught up in the absurd hysteria of the situation there's a very sensible post on instagram from someone familiar with Tibetan culture.

First seen at dharmawheel....https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.p ... 85#p661385

To my dear non-Tibetan friends who wanted my thoughts on the recent
Dalai Lama episode:

I want to preface this by saying that I viewed and processed this
incident as someone steeped in the cultures of both source language and
target language. That is to say, I am familiar with the Tibetan format of
humor (often dark) and acknowledge how different jokes can sound in
English without proper context.

As is the case with most Tibetan elders, the Dalai Lama has a tendency to
tease children and displays a certain childlike innocence. Bearing in mind
that he has a rather poor command of the English language, and with his
advanced age adding to his struggle in articulating his thoughts into
words, I think it all came down to the word "SUCK," which naturally
translates to obscenity in the English-speaking world, especially in todays
hyper sexualized world.

What the Dalai Lama said in English translates to "ngé ché lé jip" in
Tibetan. Tibetan parents and grandparents often tease their children by
holding them tight and saying these words, sticking out the tip of their
tongue almost touching the face, knowing well that the kids don't like it
and expect them to break their grip (for Tibetans unable to relate to
these experiences, I am sorry). There is nothing obscene from this
cultural perspective.

Culture gives language different contexts. Deeply-held taboos in one
culture can be normal in another. Parents kissing children on the lips is
one example. Where such a gesture nowadays can mean a death sentence
in certain parts of the world, it is viewed as an act of affection
elsewhere.


And a follow up comment from the same author...

Needless to say, as a person who’s been immersed in the richness of Tibetan culture for more than half of my life, I am infuriated by the incredibly lame journalism displayed by this story. Not only were no Tibetans (or Tibetologists) consulted on the issue–this is commonly happening to dispossessed people; no one also thought to ask anything of other people on the stage, or the parents, or literally anyone other than one’s own perverse projections. I am grateful to my non-Buddhist friends who have taken the 3 minutes it takes to ask any expert (and especially the ones who have given Tibetan voices a platform), and disappointed by the tendency to grab the bait without a second thought that some others displayed. Exactly as this was unfolding, China–that always has a bot factory attacking the Dalai Lama online-was performing military games imitating an attack on Taiwan, and yet that went under the radar. Next time someone accuses you of something untoward based on a completely out-of-context thing (and guess what, that can happen at any point), you should hope to have others genuinely inquire and not just press buttons thoughtlessly.


Mystik wrote: Tue Apr 11, 2023 5:19 pmWhat the Dalai Lama said in English translates to "ngé ché lé jip" in
Tibetan. Tibetan parents and grandparents often tease their children by
holding them tight and saying these words, sticking out the tip of their
tongue almost touching the face, knowing well that the kids don't like it
and expect them to break their grip (for Tibetans unable to relate to
these experiences, I am sorry). There is nothing obscene from this
cultural perspective.


FB_IMG_1681312881494.jpg
FB_IMG_1681312893017.jpg
FB_IMG_1681312900311.jpg




Re: Dalai Lama kisses boy and asks him to 'suck his tongue'

Post by Dorje Shedrub » 

When I first saw the clip that has been circulating I was shocked and in disbelief.

But, if you watch the full unedited video it appears that the Dalai Lama was being loving and playful. The boy, his mother, and the audience were laughing and smiling the whole time.

Helpful to understand that the Dalai Lama is very affectionate and jolly and a playful tease at times. He seems to be in the moment with people he meets and shows genuine compassion with a childlike heart and not too concerned about what people think. He is pretty straightforward and affectionate.

It helps to also understand that the Dalai Lama mistakenly said "suck my tongue" when he should have said "eat my tongue." Yes that sounds strange, but not when you understand Tibetan culture, especially in the Amdo region where he is from. Please read below.

By the way, some cultures/ families kiss children on the lips, as did my parents, grandmother's, and great aunties. The Dalai Lama is being like a loving grandfather towards the boy, playing with him, kiss him, pray for him, tickles him, and gives him a teaching. The boy laughs and smiles the whole time and this was in front of hundreds of people.

This sensationalized clip very likely is from the PRC who always tries to discredit the Dalai Lama. The event happened in February but just now this clip is circulated, just after the Dalai Lama recognized a Mongolian as the third highest lama in Tibetan Buddhism, plus high tensions with Taiwan and India. Some are asking Dalai Mama to visit Taiwan. Things to consider.
FB_IMG_1681404653494.jpg


Re: Dalai Lama kisses boy and asks him to 'suck his tongue'

Post by SilenceMonkey » 

When things like this happen, it's important to take a step back and view the situation with equanimity. Aside from the obvious media sensationalism and CCP manipulation of social media, the short video clip doesn't look good to our modern sensibilities. Kissing is so emotionally charged in the west, hearing about something like this will probably be very triggering for most of us here. When our minds are overcome with such strong emotions, they color our perception of the situation.

For starters, I think it's important to see the un-edited video (at the end of the video Mystic posted on p. 5).
Mystik wrote: Tue Apr 11, 2023 10:15 pm
santa100 wrote: Tue Apr 11, 2023 7:15 pmThank you for some useful info. from a Tibetan cultural perspective. But just to make sure non-Tibetans like myself could understand the logical flow of events: the boy wanted to hug the HHDL, so HHDL in his playful manner said "suck-my-tongue" (which meant to say "ngé ché lé jip"), hence creating sorta a boogeyman effect similar to what dr. Weston did in that old "Empty Nest" sitcom?
5 minutes into the video he explains the game elderly Tibetans often play with kids when they ask for something... kiss my cheek, bop my head, rub my nose, give me a kiss.....eat my tongue. It's a playful tease and nothing more than that. Understanding the cultural context makes the accusations of pedophilia and child abuse patently absurd, not that it will stop those with an anti-DL or anti-Tibetan Buddhist agenda from claiming otherwise.
Having spent some years with Tibetans, it looks to me pretty normal from a Tibetan cultural lens. This is what older Tibetans do with their grandchildren.

I think this incident is quite interesting from an anthropological perspective, as it highlights our attitudes towards intimacy in the west. Western culture is often very uncomfortable when it comes to kissing in a non-romantic context, except for certain cultures where it's appropriate to kiss family on the lips. For example, in certain Eruopean countries, it is quite common and accepted for families to kiss each other on the lips as a platonic way of showing affection. In the US (where I'm from), kissing on the lips is only ever seen as sexual. We often think Italians are disgusting for kissing their families like this. It's difficult for Americans to see kissing on the lips in any other way, this is our cultural lens.

It's also interesting to hear Theravadins react to this, particularly western Theravadins. (I am a Mahayana practitioner, Chinese and Tibetan Buddhism.) Theravadins are very strong in the Vinaya rules, which is quite an admirable trait. I think this also tends to produce very harsh judgement of other traditions of Buddhism. This is especially the case with Tibetan Dharma, where love and compassion will sometimes outweigh the minor vinaya rules. Eg. It's fine for Tibetan monks and nuns to sit next to someone of the opposite sex, or touch in a platonic way, to laugh and have fun, etc... In Tibetan traditions, it's often understood that feelings of love and compassion are the basis for bodhisattva path. (Of course there are yogis and ascetic types who practice differently, but you understand.) Yes, there are ways to practice metta and karuna without associating closely with other people... I'm just trying to offer some context.

I think it's also important to note that HH Dalai Lama is at such a high level of attainment, the kleshas such as desire will have no power over him. It's all empty for enlightened beings like His Holiness. In a similar vein, I recently heard a story about an arahant in the Theravada tradition who received massages from a woman. It caused quite a stir. But from the arahant's perspective, there was no lust involved. It was only his body being massaged.


Wednesday, April 19, 2023

Saturday, April 15, 2023

muditā as brahma-vihāra: joy opposes dissatisfaction, not weird Abhidhammic "envy opposing jealously"

 

Re: The translation of Muditā

Post by frank k » 

balaputradeva wrote: Fri Apr 14, 2023 7:40 am
Dhammanando wrote: Mon Feb 18, 2013 2:03 amThis is not to say that joy doesn’t arise on account of one’s own sampattis, but merely that ‘joy’ in this case would be a term for something other than muditā. Whereas muditā is always reckoned as wholesome (except when occurring in the kiriyācittas of an arahant, when it is merely functional), the joy that arise in connection with one’s own sampattis may be wholesome or unwholesome. If, for example, you win the lottery and joy arises as you dream of all the ways you’ll now be able to indulge yourself, then this would be unwholesome pīti and sukha. But if joy arises as you contemplate all the gifts that you now plan to give people, then it would be wholesome pīti and sukha. In neither case would the joy be termed muditā.
Then, how about being mudita for someone happiness form successful rob bank, get money from telling lies, murder, etc? Is this also called mudita?
Thanks

Re-reading this thread, I notice another problem with Dhammanando's analysis on page 1:
None of the occurrences of the term in the Sutta Pitaka is accompanied by any definition as such. However, the abhidhammic identification of muditā as a state opposed to arati is supported in the Dasuttara Sutta:

Or he might say, "I have developed the emancipation of the heart through sympathetic joy, and yet resentment still grips my heart..." He should be told, "No! Do not say that! Do not misrepresent the Blessed Lord, it is not right to slander him thus, for he would not have said such a thing! Your words are unfounded and impossible. If you develop the emancipation of the heart through sympathetic joy, resentment has no chance to envelop your heart. This emancipation through sympathetic joy is the cure for resentment."
arati is not envy or 'resentment' as he translates above, in opposition to mudita.
He's clearly influenced by commentary and Abhidhamma.
arati is:
fem. dissatisfaction; dislike; discontent; aversion; boredom; lit. non-delight [na > a + √ram + ti] ✓
joy is what opposes dissatisfaction, not a weirdly specific non-envy to oppose envy/resentment.

If you see my analysis here,
http://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/20 ... -what.html
AN 5.162 is the sutta that really gives an authoratative definition and context for mudita as a brahmavihara, and supports my conclusion from the previous post.
That mudita as a brahmavihara is no different that pīti+pamojja -pa-mudita causal chain in the 7 awakening factor sequence.
That rejoicing in skillful dharmas can be directed at oneself, others, both, etc.