Suffering and its limit -- the happiness of Nirvana (was Re: Bhutan fighting)

[Tang Huyen]

Is there no place sacred from the folly of worldly minded mankind?

No. All is dukkha. Congratulations on your deepening understanding
of it.
Sarvam dukkham, sarvam anityam

Uh, I'll get back to you on that when I've learned Pali.
:-)

It's sanskrit ain't it? All is suffering, all is transient(impermanent)
Anyway it sounds like something Mr. Buddha would have said.

I have tried to correct this *mis*understanding a few times, here it goes, in
some disorder.

It is incorrect to say: All is suffering. The Buddha never says any such thing.

Only the compositions (sa.nkhaara, the fourth aggregate) are suffering. All
thing-events (dhamma) are devoid of self.

The three marks (lak.sa.na, lakkha.na), the three or four seals (dharma-mudraa),
the four summaries of the Law (dharmoddaana) are listed at Lamotte, Vimalakirti,
165, n. 51.

1. "All the compositions are impermanent" (Sanskrit anityaa.h
sarva-sa.mskaaraa.h, Pali sabbe sa.nkhaaraa aniccaa).

2. "All the compositions are suffering" (Sanskrit du.hkhaa.h
sarva-sa.mskaaraa.h, Pali sabbe sa.nkhaaraa dukkhaa).

3. "All the thing-events are no-self" (Sanskrit anaatmaanaa.h sarva-dharmaa.h,
Pali sabbe dhammaa anattaa). <Notice the switch from the compositions to
thing-events>

4. "Nirvana is peaceful" (nirvaa.na.m 'saantam, 'saanta.m nirvaa.nam, both in
Sanskrit) is the third or fourth, depending on sources (not in Pali). <It
happens in this life>

The Chinese Conjoined Agama (Samyukta-Agama) has four: all compositions are
impermanent, all compositions are suffering, all thing-events are without self,
Nirvana is peaceful. 66b14, 66c7 and 66c21.

Most Great Vehiclistic sources have the four. The Tibetans tend to follow
All-Exists, Root-All-Exists, and Great Vehiclistic sources, and therefore
mention four.

When something exists in the Chinese Agama-s and doesn't exist in the Pali
Nikaya-s, one shouldn't jump to the conclusion that the Pali is older and
therefore sparer. The Pali often forgets and messes up what it had previously,
and may well have had all four in the past. I take all four to come from the
Buddha. However, this is a mere conjecture.

The first Noble Truth describes suffering and its various forms, the second
Truth shows how suffering arises, the third shows that suffering is ended, and
the fourth shows how to end it. Suffering encompasses *only one part* of
experience, the part driven by desire which builds up a self to satisfy it,
desire. Technically desire fuels the compositions, which compose a self (itself
a composition) to coordinate the various intentions to gratify desire, and those
various intentions are also compositions.

Nibbana is the state wherein the compositions are quiesced whilst one still is
fully aware of what happens. The Buddha defines it as the calming of all the
compositions (sabba-sankhara-samatho). When all the compositions are quiesced,
no more suffering occurs and happiness and joy occur, and that state is Nibbana.
Even it is devoid of self.

The Buddha teaches suffering *and* the ending of suffering (therefore *not* all
is suffering), in this fathom-long body. The ending of suffering ushers in peace
and joy, which he describes.

For the awakened while in life, the Buddha speaks of the four joys: joy of
desirelessness, joy of aloofness, joy of calm, joy of awakening (nekkhama-sukha,
paviveka-sukha, upasama-sukha, sambodha-sukha). MA, 191, 738a, SA, 485, 124b,
MN, I, 454 (66), III, 110 (140), Harivarman, Tattva-siddhi, T, 32, 1646,
353c1-2.

The Potthapada sutta (DN 9, I, 195-196) says that there are three obtentions of
existential state (atta-patilabha, literally acquisition of self): the obtention
of the gross existential state, the mind-made state, the formless state
respectively, corresponding to the desire realm, the form realm and the formless
realm. The Buddha continues with the *abandoning* of the three obtentions:

"I teach the Law for the abandoning of the obtention of existential state so
that you, who put the teaching into practice, afflicting states may be abandoned
and purifying states may be increased, and that you may, by realisation
yourselves here and now with direct knowledge enter into and abide in the
fullness of understanding's perfection.... If it is thought that to do that is
an abiding in suffering (dukkho ca kho viharo ti), that is not so; on the
contrary, it is by doing that there is gladness, happiness, tranquillity,
mindfulness, watchfulness, and an abiding in joy (pamujjam c' eva bhavissati
piti ca passadhi ca sati ca sampajaññañ ca, sukho ca viharo)."

This state of joy or pleasure or happiness (sukha) is Nirvana; absent from it is
suffering or pain (dukkha). Another word for Nirvana is along the same line:
piti "joy", in the freedom (vimutti) from the three poisons, namely desire,
hatred, delusion.

"Monks! Joy (piti) arises in a monk who, having extinguished the cankers
(khina-asava), reflects on the mind liberated from desire, reflects on the mind
liberated from hatred, reflects on the mind liberated from delusion. (Ya kho
bhikkhave khinavasassa bhikkhuno raga-cittam vimuttam paccavekkhato, dosa-cittam
vimuttam paccavekkhato, moha-cittam vimuttam paccavekkhato uppajjati piti)" SN,
IV, 236 (36, 29).

Our life is redeemed in this state of joy and gladness, when suffering has
ended, in this very fathom-long body.

There is nothing negative about that.

As to the Second Truth, it is: "What is the Noble Truth of the origin of
suffering? It is craving, which renews becoming, and is accompanied by delight
and passion (trsna paunarbhaviki nandi-raga-sahagata), relishing here and here
(tatra tatrabhinandini)." DN, II, 308 (22), MA, 13, 435c-436a, SA, 71, 18c4,
Waldschmidt, Catusparisatsutra, 160. The three cravings are "craving for
[existence in the] pleasure [modality], in the form [modality], and in the
formless [modality]," according to MA, 29, 463a22, 114, 603a27, SA, 298, 85b,
895, 225a, 1177, 317a (the three cravings in Pali are for pleasure, becoming,
and non-becoming, but DN, III, 216 [33] has both lists). In addition the Buddha
says of the second Truth:

"this Holy Truth of the arisal of suffering must be given up (tam kho panidam
dukkha-samudayam ariya-saccam pahatabban, Skt. tat khalu duhkha-samudayam
arya-satyam abhijñaya prahatavyam)." SA, 379, 103c19, SN, V, 422 (56, 11, 10),
Sangha-bheda-vastu, I, 135, Maha-vastu, III, 333.

He says what he says, and means it. After one has realized the four Holy Truths
(and not all Buddhist saints, but only a few of them, do so), they are gone for
good, period, end of discussion, all of them and not just the second one. But
Mrs. C. A. F. Rhys-Davids, in n. 1 appended to Woodward’s translation of the
Kindred Sayings, V, 358 says: "But we must omit ariya-saccam; otherwise the text
would mean ‘the Ariyan truth about the arising of Ill is to be put away. Craving
has to be put away.’" (See J. J. Jones, tr., Mahavastu, London: Pali Text
Society, 1956, III, 326, n. 1). Mrs. Rhys-Davids, no shrinking violet when it
comes to expounding and defending her attachment to the self (atta), shrinks
back from the unholy thought that a Holy Truth can and should be put away!
Heaven forbid! Is there anything holy anymore? Her pious attachment is quite
moving.

The Four Noble Truths, like all Buddhist teachings, are meant to be
self-abandoning in their success. When their job is done, they're forsaken, and
not cleaved. When they're true (i. e., successful), they're through.

Tang Huyen

[Yawwn]

Post by Tang Huyen

Is there no place sacred from the folly of worldly minded mankind?

No. All is dukkha. Congratulations on your deepening understanding
of it.
Sarvam dukkham, sarvam anityam

Uh, I'll get back to you on that when I've learned Pali.
:-)

It's sanskrit ain't it? All is suffering, all is transient(impermanent)
Anyway it sounds like something Mr. Buddha would have said.

I have tried to correct this *mis*understanding a few times, here it goes, in
some disorder.
It is incorrect to say: All is suffering. The Buddha never says any such thing.
Only the compositions (sa.nkhaara, the fourth aggregate) are suffering. All
thing-events (dhamma) are devoid of self.

======

"Bhikkhus, All is impermanent"...(Sabba.m, bhikkhave, anicca.m)<
Samyutta N. 35:43

"Bhikkhus, All is Dukkha"...(Sabba.m, bhikkhave, dukkha.m)< Samyutta
N. 35:44

The Buddha then goes on to qualify what he means by the "All" in these
Suttas

"And what is the all that is dukkha?
The eye is dukkha
Forms are dukkha
Eye-consciousness is dukkha
Eye-contact is dukkha
Whatever feeling arises with eye contact as condition is dukkha

The ear is dukkha..etc
The tongue is dukkha...etc
The body is dukkha...etc
The mind(mano) is dukkha...etc

Seeing thus, bhikkhus, the instructed noble disciple experiances
disenchantment towards the eye,towards forms,towards
eye-consciousness,towards eye-contact,towards whatever feeling arises
with eye-contact as condition..he experiancces disenchantment towards
the ear,tongue,body,mind etc...Experiancing disenchantment, he becomes
dispassionate. Through dispassion his mind is liberated. When it is
liberated there comes the knowledge ; its(citta) liberated. He
understands:' Destroyed is birth, the holy life has been lived, what
had to be done is done, there is no more for this state of beings.'<
Samyutta N. 35:44

eye = rupa khandha
whatever feeling arises with eye-contact = vedana khandha
eye-contact includes sanna/perception = sa~n~na khandha
eye=consciousness = vi~n~nana khandha

Or to put it another way>>

"Is what is impermanent dukkha or happiness?"..."Dukkha venerable
sir"<Samyutta N. 35:32

Nibbana is neither impermanent or included in the "All" in the above
Sutta.

May all beings develope insight into the 3 characteristics of all
sankharas,(conditioned phenomena)impermanence/dukkha/not-self and
realize the deathless element....Nibbana.

Yawwn.


* Sankhara:
4. It occurs further in the sense of anything formed
(sankhata, q.v.) and conditioned, and includes all
things whatever in the world, all phenomena of existence.
This meaning applies, e.g. to the well-known
passage, "All formations are impermanent" <<From Manual of
Buddhist Terms by Venerable Nyanatiloka.

[Tang Huyen]

Post by Yawwn
======
"Bhikkhus, All is impermanent"...(Sabba.m, bhikkhave, anicca.m)<
Samyutta N. 35:43
"Bhikkhus, All is Dukkha"...(Sabba.m, bhikkhave, dukkha.m)< Samyutta
N. 35:44
The Buddha then goes on to qualify what he means by the "All" in these
Suttas
"And what is the all that is dukkha?
The eye is dukkha
Forms are dukkha
Eye-consciousness is dukkha
Eye-contact is dukkha
Whatever feeling arises with eye contact as condition is dukkha
The ear is dukkha..etc
The tongue is dukkha...etc
The body is dukkha...etc
The mind(mano) is dukkha...etc
Seeing thus, bhikkhus, the instructed noble disciple experiances
disenchantment towards the eye,towards forms,towards
eye-consciousness,towards eye-contact,towards whatever feeling arises
with eye-contact as condition..he experiancces disenchantment towards
the ear,tongue,body,mind etc...Experiancing disenchantment, he becomes
dispassionate. Through dispassion his mind is liberated. When it is
liberated there comes the knowledge ; its(citta) liberated. He
understands:' Destroyed is birth, the holy life has been lived, what
had to be done is done, there is no more for this state of beings.'<
Samyutta N. 35:44
eye = rupa khandha
whatever feeling arises with eye-contact = vedana khandha
eye-contact includes sanna/perception = sa~n~na khandha
eye=consciousness = vi~n~nana khandha
Or to put it another way>>
"Is what is impermanent dukkha or happiness?"..."Dukkha venerable
sir"<Samyutta N. 35:32
Nibbana is neither impermanent or included in the "All" in the above
Sutta.
May all beings develope insight into the 3 characteristics of all
sankharas,(conditioned phenomena)impermanence/dukkha/not-self and
realize the deathless element....Nibbana.
Yawwn.
4. It occurs further in the sense of anything formed
(sankhata, q.v.) and conditioned, and includes all
things whatever in the world, all phenomena of existence.
This meaning applies, e.g. to the well-known
passage, "All formations are impermanent" <<From Manual of
Buddhist Terms by Venerable Nyanatiloka.

Thank you, Richard, for providing a text that I missed.

This text is one of many where the Buddha exaggerates, perhaps to drive a point
home, but there are several such texts which, when confronted with the rest of
the early canon, conflict with some parts and agree with some other parts.

One paradigmatic case is when the Buddha says that all is on fire. In all
probability he is in front of fire-worshippers, and leans on their own belief
and lays it thick on them, with a vengeance, to drive his point home.

The text quoted by you conflicts with the repeated assertions, that Nirvana is
happiness and is experienced here and now, in this body. I quoted:

"Monks! Joy (piti) arises in a monk who, having extinguished the cankers
(khina-asava), reflects on the mind liberated from desire, reflects on the mind
liberated from hatred, reflects on the mind liberated from delusion. (Ya kho
bhikkhave khinavasassa bhikkhuno raga-cittam vimuttam paccavekkhato, dosa-cittam
vimuttam paccavekkhato, moha-cittam vimuttam paccavekkhato uppajjati piti)" SN,
IV, 236 (36, 29).

On the other hand, it goes well with the text where he talks about transcending
the sense-organs, etc.

"Herein what are the six equanimities connected with worldly life? When a
foolish common person has seen form with the eye, there arises the equanimity of
an uninstructed common person who has not conquered [his defilements], who has
not conquered fruition, who does not see the peril — equanimity such as this
does not transcend form. Therefore this is called equanimity connected with
worldly life. When a foolish common person has heard sound with the ear ...
smelt a smell with the nose ... tasted a taste with the tongue ... felt a
feeling with the body ... cognised an object-of-mind with the mind ...
equanimity such as this does not transcend (ativattati) objects-of-mind. Herein
what are the six equanimities connected with renunciation? When one has known
the impermanence of forms themselves, their alteration, disappearance and
cessation, and thinks: ‘Formerly as well as now, all these forms are
impermanent, suffering, liable to alteration,’ from seeing thus as it really is
by means of perfect wisdom, equanimity arises — equanimity such as this
transcends (ativattati) form. Therefore this is called equanimity connected with
renunciation (nekkhama-sita upekha, Skt. naiskramyasrita). When one has known
the impermanence of sounds themselves ... smells themselves ... tastes
themselves ... feelings themselves ... objects-of-mind themselves ... equanimity
such as this transcends (ativattati) objects-of-mind." MA, 163, 693a29-b2, MN,
III, 219 (137), cited in paraphrase (but all important bits are present and
given verbatim) by Asanga, Xien yáng shèng jiao lùn, T, 31, 1602, 504b-505a. The
MA has not the part: "equanimity such as this transcends form (rupam sa
ativattati)," but just before that, with regard to "equanimity connected with
worldly life (geha-sita upekha)," it gives, 693a28: "equanimity such as this
does not transcend form (rupam sa nativattati)." Harivarman, Tattva-siddhi, T,
32, 1646, 284a18-19, 285c13-14 quotes this latter part. Sanskrit naiskramyasrita
(should be naiskamyasrita) survives in another sutra quoted at Vyakhya, 96, also
Émile Sénart, ed., Mahavastu, Paris, 1882-1897, I-III, here I, 173. See also
Maha-vibhasa, T, 27, 1545, 719a-b.

At SA, 4-6, 1b-c, Turfanfunde, IV, 77, by "detaching from the desire for"
(chandam vi-ragayitva) each of the aggregates, "the mind is liberated from it"
(tatas cittam vimocayitva). See also SA, 10, 2a, 48, 12a, SN, III, 179 (22, 146)
("one is liberated from form [rupamha parimuccati]"), 66, 17c, 87, 22b (both
have: "one is liberated from form"), 290, 82a ("one is liberated from form,"
Nidana-samyukta, 121: "one is liberated from contact [sparsad api parimucyate],
from feeling to consciousness [vedanayah ... vijñanad api parimucyate]"). SA,
58, 14c23 (Scripture of the Ten Questions), MN, III, 18 (109) say: "The cutting
of desire and lust (chanda-raga-pahana), the transcending of desire and lust
(chanda-raga-vinaya) is the escape from form (rupe nissarana)." SA, 32, 7a, 354,
99b speak of "transcending form (and the other aggregates)" and of "transcending
contact" respectively.

So, to the Buddha, one can be liberated from the aggregates, the twelve
sense-fields, etc. However it has to be kept in mind that experience is unitary
and not divided, and the five aggregates, the twelve sense-fields, etc. are
merely useful methods of cutting-up and labelling that help in doing away with
cutting-up and labelling.

But to return to the topic of the limit of suffering: it depends on how one
circumscribes suffering, on what realm one identifies it with. One can well say
that the sense-spheres, etc. are suffering, so long as one also takes the ending
of suffering to coincide with the letting go of such sense-spheres, with the
transcending of them. But if one simply takes the sense-spheres, etc. to span
both suffering *and* the ending of suffering (which should be obvious, as the
awakened still has a body until his death, just like everybody else), then
suffering is limited to the realm of the compositions. The realm of the absence
of the compositions coincides with Nirvana, with all sense-spheres intact, just
like before.

"Whoever are the recluses and brahmans who make known the acquiring of this
place by mere compositions (sankhara-mattena) of the seen, the heard, the
sensed, the known — this is shown, monks, as destructive to acquiring of that
place. For it is not this place, monks, that is shown to be attainable by
attainments with compositions (sa-sankhara-samapatti); this place is shown,
monks, to be attainable by attainments with no remainder of compositions (the
meaning requires a-sankhara ‘vasesa-samapatti, the PTS text has sa-sankhara
‘vasesa-samapatti). Knowing that what is composed is gross, but that there is
this which is the cessation of compositions (sankharanam nirodho), the
Tathagata, seeing the escape (nissarana) from it, is gone beyond it
(upativatto)." MN, II, 230-231 (102).

So it seems that the Buddha varies his points of view, sometimes talking as if
identifying the sense-spheres, etc. with suffering, sometimes as if identifying
the compositions with suffering, and one has to jump (dance) with him to get his
meaning. He doesn't stick with just one (consistent) viewpoint.

Whatever needs to be done, at that moment, to awaken his hearers of that
occasion, he does it. (Though he also makes grievous mistakes, as when he
teaches contemplation of the unclean and a bunch of monks kill themselves, which
just shows that he is human, limited and susceptible to error, like all of us,
and awakening doesn't mean omniscience and omnipotence at all).

Tang Huyen

[Tang Huyen]

"It is impossible to tell it [all] without remainder, showing each
kind of suffering, even [by going on doing so] for many aeons, so the
Blessed One said 'In short the five aggregates [as objects] of
clinging are suffering' in order to show in short how all that
suffering is present in any of the five aggregates [as objects] of
clinging in the same way that the taste of the water in the whole
ocean is to be found in a single drop of its water."
-- Buddhaghosa in "The Path of Purification," XVI, 60 (Bhikkhu
Nanamoli's translation)
This entire chapter XVI, "The Faculties and Truths," is a very useful
discussion of the matter. One is tempted to also include his comment
in section 86, "all states except craving and states free from cankers
are included in the truth of suffering," but that really should be
read in the context of the entire discussion, in which Buddhaghosa
describes the Truths
"As to class, and derivation,
Division by character, et cetera,
As to meaning, tracing out meaning,
And likewise neither less nor more,
As to order, as to expounding
Birth and so on, knowledge's function,
As to division of the content,
As to a simile, and tetrad,
As to void, singlefold and so on,
Similar and dissimilar---
Thus should be known the exposition
By those who know the teaching's order."
This takes up sections 13-83 of the chapter, and then there is an
interesting general discussion from which the above quote at 86 is
taken.
Barb

Thank you for your contribution.

To me, the Buddha explains the issue in very few words.

He says: “If one tends to anything (Skt. anusete) then one follows on it
(anuniyate), and if one follows on it one is bound by grasping (upadaya
samyuktah),” and the opposite: “If one does not tend to anything then one does
not follow on it, and if one does not follow on it one is freed by not grasping
(anupadaya visamyuktah)”. Poussin, “Documents,” 571, SA, 15, 3a. This Sanskrit
text has the symmetrical formula: “One is bound by grasping, and one is freed by
not grasping” (upadaya samyuktah anupadaya visamyuktah).”

There a text which exists in Chinese and Pali, and which relates
Maha-Maudgalyayana's experience with the signless concentration. The Chinese
calls it the saintly dwelling (arya-vihara). By not attending to all signs (Skt.
sarva-nimittanam amanasikarad), he realizes in the body the signless
concentration of mind (Skt. animitta-cetah-samadhi). He dwells in it much, but
the sign-pursuing consciousness (nimittanusari viññanam, Skt. nimittanusari
vijñanam) arises. The Buddha then comes by spiritual power to warn him:
"Maudgalyayana! You ought to dwell in the saintly dwelling, and not be remiss!"
The Chinese says that it happens thus three times. SA, 502, 132b-c, SN, IV,
268-269 (40, 9).

The sign-pursuing consciousness is the beginning of delusion, and to quiesce it
is the beginning of wisdom. The object of consciousness doesn't change. When one
grasps the object of consciousness, one is bound, when one doesn't, one is
freed.

Tang Huyen

[naked ape]

"Tang Huyen" <***@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:***@yahoo.com...
SNIP

Post by Tang Huyen
The text quoted by you conflicts with the repeated assertions, that Nirvana is
"Monks! Joy (piti) arises in a monk who, having extinguished the cankers
(khina-asava), reflects on the mind liberated from desire, reflects on the mind
liberated from hatred, reflects on the mind liberated from delusion. (Ya kho
bhikkhave khinavasassa bhikkhuno raga-cittam vimuttam paccavekkhato, dosa-cittam
vimuttam paccavekkhato, moha-cittam vimuttam paccavekkhato uppajjati piti)" SN,
IV, 236 (36, 29).

If this is Buddhism, I'd be more inclined to embrace it. .. Ape;)

[Tang Huyen]

Of course not...in the Mahayana tradition. The Theravada way is
stricter precisely because it is the teaching of the elders, many of
whom, male and female, became arahats.
Never mind competing with today's bhikkhus: how do these religious
women of today measure up against the earlier Theravada bhikkhunis
once one subtracts all the temporary modern debris from the situation
(for example, fabrications like "status," a prominent word used in not
a few of the online articles on this subject, and "equality," a
Christian concept)? That, rather than some lineage dug up in
countries with a Mahayana tradition by investigators whose objectivity
could be questioned, is the central point, and I haven't seen it
discussed yet in the online articles.
Barb

It's hard to be as confused as you are, Barb.

You say: <<"equality," a Christian concept>>.

In fact, equality is Buddhist, through and through, from the Buddha on down, but
the Great Vehicle makes a huge case of it, as in the equality of all beings with
regard to awakening (the Buddha focuses instead on the few who have but a little
dust in their eye) and the Bodhisattva looking at all thing-events (including
himself) in utter euqality, not preferring some to the disadvantage of others.

If you have a grudge with Christianity, work that out, rather than charging in
to switch headlong to another religion, into which you bring all your baggage
anyway. And to all appearance your baggage is loaded. You need to unload it --
or at least goodly parts of it -- before any commitment to Buddhism can become
fruitful. Otherwise you'll only repeat your past bad habits, just under
different garb.

By the way, Buddhist ordination goes by Vinaya lineage, not by doctrine, so
whether one is ordained in a Great Vehiclistic environment or not doesn't
matter, what matter is that one is ordained by a legitimate quorum of monks (and
for ordination of nuns, ordaining nuns also are required) who themselves have
been ordained properly and who have kept the Vinaya. That is how the current
revival of bhikkhuni/bhiksuni lineages in Theravada and the Tibetan religion
develops: it needs nuns from existing lineages (like in Taiwan) to make the
ordination of nuns legitimate.

Tang Huyen

[voidtech]

Post by Tang Huyen

Is there no place sacred from the folly of worldly minded mankind?

No. All is dukkha. Congratulations on your deepening understanding
of it.
Sarvam dukkham, sarvam anityam

Uh, I'll get back to you on that when I've learned Pali.
:-)

It's sanskrit ain't it? All is suffering, all is transient(impermanent)
Anyway it sounds like something Mr. Buddha would have said.

I have tried to correct this *mis*understanding a few times, here it goes, in
some disorder.
It is incorrect to say: All is suffering. The Buddha never says any such thing.

Your right in a sense. Actually Siddhartha said it the night he left
home so, technically, the Buddha didn't really say it.
...he did not eat that night. He went to bed but he could not sleep.
by his side, his wife Yashodhara and his young son were sleeping. He
looked at them intensely. The thought flashed in his mind, "All is
sorrow(Sarvam dukham). Then he declarred, all is filled with
fear,(sarvam bhayam, bhayam, bhayam). Next he declared, "All is
emptiness, (Sarvam anityam, anityam, anityam). Making these
declarations, he left the palace...
voidtech

Post by Tang Huyen
Nirvana is peaceful.

You said it Tango!
jth

YAWWN?

***@plentymad.com

[John Timothy Hall]

Post by Tang Huyen

Is there no place sacred from the folly of worldly minded mankind?

No. All is dukkha. Congratulations on your deepening understanding
of it.
Sarvam dukkham, sarvam anityam

Uh, I'll get back to you on that when I've learned Pali.
:-)

It's sanskrit ain't it? All is suffering, all is transient(impermanent)
Anyway it sounds like something Mr. Buddha would have said.

I have tried to correct this *mis*understanding a few times, here it goes, in
some disorder.
It is incorrect to say: All is suffering. The Buddha never says any such thing.

Your right in a sense. Actually Siddhartha said it the night he left
home so, technically, the Buddha didn't really say it.
...he did not eat that night. He went to bed but he could not sleep.
by his side, his wife Yashodhara and his young son were sleeping. He
looked at them intensely. The thought flashed in his mind, "All is
sorrow(Sarvam dukham). Then he declarred, all is filled with
fear,(sarvam bhayam, bhayam, bhayam). Next he declared, "All is
emptiness, (Sarvam anityam, anityam, anityam). Making these
declarations, he left the palace...
voidtech

Post by Tang Huyen
Nirvana is peaceful.

You said it Tango!
jth

YAWWN?

Yawwn Hall?
--

[al.knudsen]

This post might be inappropriate. Click to display it.