Ñánavíra Thera

Miscellany

(A collection of various loose papers)






The usual reason given for saying that nibbána is anattá, is simply that there is clearly no attá in nibbána, that nibbána is void of attá. It is only on the surface that this seems to be true. A closer inspection shows it involves one or other of two misconceptions. If it is taken together with the fact that the five aggregates are void of attá, it implies that the five aggregates and nibbána are on the same level. But nibbána is, in fact, void of the five aggregates. If it is taken together with the fact that nibbána is void of the five aggregates, it implies that attá and the five aggregates are on the same level. But the five aggregates (which are real) are, in fact, void of attá (which is imaginary).




Upaníyati loko addhuvo ti.
Attáno loko anabhissaro ti.
Assako loko sabbam paháya gamaníyan ti.
Úno loko atitto tanhádáso ti.

Transient is the world, unstable.
Without shelter is the world, without an overlord.
Not one's own is the world, having put all away one must go.
Wanting is the world, insatiate, a/the slave to/of craving.




Eye is old action, it should be known and seen, having been determined and intended.




Dependent arising has neither duration nor instantaneity: it is, as it were, the gradient of the curve of existence taken over an infinitesimally short period. At any time, thus, it describes what is now happening.




Chaque dimension... ['Each dimension is the For-itself's way of projecting itself vainly toward the Self, of being what it is beyond a nothingness, a different way of being this fall of being, this frustration of being which the For-itself has to be.' B&N, p. 137] ...Pour-soi à être.  p. 183.




Námarúpa = rúpa and rúpa-given-rúpa [náma]
repetition of this is rúpa and r-g-r and r + r-g-r given r + r-g-r. [r-g-r is not-r]
námarúpa which is rúpa and rúpa-given-rúpa and r-g-r[1] and (r-g-r given r-g-r). This now is asserted afresh, wherefore r-given-r is r' (i.e. not-r, but on the same level).




Given the straightforward hierarchy of experience. In Immediate Experience attention rests on the world. This requires no effort. In Reflexive Experience attention moves back one step in the hierarchy. It does not, however, move back spontaneously: it requires to be pulled back by an intention that sees both the fundamental (or ground) level and the first step. This intention is located on the second step. A deliberate intention to enter upon reflexion requires a further intention on the third step; for deliberate intention is intention to intend (= volition). Double attention is involved. But though, in Immediate Experience, attention rests at ground level, the entire hierarchy remains 'potential' (it is there, but not attended to), and Immediate Experience is always under potential reflexive observation (i.e. it is 'seen' but not 'noticed'). The added complication of 'self' is not, despite philosophical opinion, an essential feature of this structure. Sartre's reflet-reflétant (p. 118) is a brave (but inadequate[2]) effort to describe the structure of 'self'; but he is quite wrong to reject Spinoza's idea-ideae-ideae-....to infinity. In the puthujjana both are found.




All things obey the Laws of Science, except when they don't.




Graecum est: non legitur.





    Note on Catupatisambhidá
The Four Departments/Discriminations

  1. ATTHAº -- (Identification of) REFERENT.
    (a) When communication is not involved: -- Selection of relevant, and rejection of irrelevant, signs (any event mental or material, perceiving which we think of something else, is a sign; the 'something else' is the referent and, ultimately, is an expectation/expected[3] event) until the completion of a context/pattern of events becomes clear. (N.B. Some relevant signs will be remote both in time and place. Signs may be mental or material.) (Primary) interpretation of the sign situation. [I sweat on a warm Tuesday. Referent: Activation of sweat glands by heat -- Tuesday is not a relevant sign (or is not a sign).]
    (b) When communication is involved: -- Expansion of symbol (symbols are signs as words or gestures in rational communication) until sign-situation behind the symbolized reference/communication becomes clear. (Primary) interpretation of the symbol situation. (See Meaning of Meaning, Canon III.)
    Cf. Nítattho -- Unqualified or literal
    Neyyatho -- Qualified or provisional     		interpretation of symbols (Ang. II,iii,5-6 [A.i,60]).
    Etam attham viditvá -- having grasped/felt/known (see 2. Cf. below) the interpretation of/the (sign or symbol) situation. (Udána, passim)
    Ime dhammá ekatthá vyañjanameva nánanti -- these things are one in referent/interpretation and various only in the letter. (Citta Samy. 1 [S.iv,281]).
    Suggested translations.
    Technical:

    Literary:     		(Identification of) Referent.
    (Primary) Interpretation of the sign/symbol situation.
    Interpretation. [Bespoke for upaparikkhati?]
    Meaning [convenient but vague].
    Significance.
    Sense.

  2. DHAMMAº -- (Correct) REFERENCE.
    Allotting of interpretations of signs or symbols to the proper context. Seeing the wider significance of interpreted sign or symbol situations (events or communications), in particular in the context of the Buddha's Teaching.
    Cf. Attham na jánáti. Dhammam na passati. -- He does not know the referent/interpretation. He does not see the reference/idea.
    Suggested translations.
    Technical:
    Literary:     		(Correct) Reference.
    Literary: (True) Ideas.

  3. NIRUTTIº -- (Knowledge of) SYMBOLS.
    Knowledge of actual and conventional usage of symbols to symbolize and communicate reference. Awareness of the general or individual reaction to words and gestures.
    Cf. D. 15 -- Nirutti is equivalent to adhivacana (expression) and paññatti (denotation). M. 139 -- Janapadanirutti -- Local usage, dialect.
    Suggested translations.
    Technical:

    Literary:     		(Knowledge of) Symbols.
    Verbal usage.
    Language.
    Speech.
    Dialect.
    ['Expression', already bespoke by adhivacana, is condemned in Meaning of Meaning.]

  4. PATIBHÁNAº -- (Appropriate) SYMBOLIZATION.
    Ability to symbolize reference by appropriate words and gestures. Perspicuous expression of ideas.
    Cf. Yuttapatibháno -- Pertinent perspicuity,
    Muttapatibháno -- Fluent perspicuity (Ang. IV,xiv,2 [A.ii,135])
    Appatibháno -- Without perspicuity, tongue-tied (M. 152)
    Suggested translations.
    Technical:
    Literary:     		(Appropriate) Symbolization.
    Perspicuity.
    [Query: how to translate patibháti. Patibháti mam Bhagavá...patibhátu tam Vangísa (Vangísathera Samy. 5).]
    Dhammá pi mam na patibhanti (Khandha Samy. ix,2 [S.iii,106]).





Dvayanissito khváyam Kaccáyana loko yebhuyyena atthitañ ceva natthitañ ca. Lokasamudayam kho Kaccáyana yathábhútam sammapaññáya passato yá loke natthitá sá na hoti: lokanirodham kho Kaccáyana yathábhútam sammapaññáya passato yá loke atthitá sá na hoti. Nidána/Abhisamaya Samy. 15 (S.ii,17)
Atthitá ceases when cessation of the world is seen
Yathábhútam, i.e. when cessation is seen to occur with cessation of conditions.
Natthitá ceases when arising of the world is seen
Yathábhútam, i.e. when arising is seen to occur with arising of conditions.
Therefore: -- Atthitá is the view that the world arises or contiues, even though conditions have ceased.
Natthitá is the view that the world ceases, even though conditions arise or continue.
Therefore: (i) Where there is no world (i.e. pañcakkhandhá) one cannot say 'Atthíti'.
(ii) Where there are no conditions (i.e. rágadosamoha) one cannot say 'Natthíti'.
But: -- (i) In 'one who has passed away' (atthangato) there are no five khandhas. (After anupádisesa.)
(ii) In 'one who has passed away' there is no rágadosamoha. (Before anupádisesa.)
Therefore: In 'one who has passed away' there is nothing whereby one might say either (i) Atthíti, or (ii) Natthíti.
Sabbesu dhammesu samúhatesu Samúhatá vádapathá pi sabbe may then easily be understood as follows: --
'When all phenomena (both (i) paccuppanná dhammá [five khandhas] and (ii) paccayas [rágadosamoha]) have been removed, all ways of saying (both atthíti and natthíti), too, have been removed.

For there to be contact, inertia must be felt; the datum must be perceived; but the feeling and the perception must be specific (and this is designation-contact). And vice versa, for there to be contact feeling must possess inertia, it must endure; and perception must have a datum, there must be something that is perceived; but the inertia and the datum must be specific (and this is resistance-contact). Any inertia and datum can be specifically felt and perceived (a specific pleasant blue light can endure for any length of time); and any feeling and perception can have a specific inertia and datum (a specific alternation of long and short can be any pleasant or unpleasant coloured light). But for contact, both must be specific, and thus both designation and resistance are needed.

Whence by you, B, then seen shall be merely seen.
Thence you, B, will not be that by which [the seen] -- i.e. the perceiver.
Thence you, B, will not be that where [= therein (the seen)] -- i.e. the conceiver.
Thence you, B, will not be there [the perceiver], nor beyond [the conceiver], nor between both [the (visual) cognizer (or seer)].

Perception is by which
The Perceiver is that by which
Conception is where
The Conceiver is that where ['where' in the sense of a bare datum]
Perception and Conception is by which there, or námañca rúpañca (adhivacana-patigha)
tena = tam yena     yena = by which
tattha = tam yattha     yattha = where

Yena and yattha fulfil each other and do not require a tam in addition -- i.e. there is the percept and the concept but no perceiver or conceiver.

Yato te Báhiya ditthe ditthamattam bhavissati... tato tvam B na tena
Thence B there will not be that visible object [in the world complete with negatives] of zero visibility by reason of which you are perceived [as visible]. (Can end of perception [and conception (as subjectivity of the world)] form a point of view?)
Tato tvam B na tattha
Thence B there will not be an 'in the world' [of that said visible object (the said object of zero visibility is nothing beyond 'that which is in the world')] by reason of which you are conceived [as the subjectivity of the world]
Tato tvam B n'ev'idha na huram na ubhaya...
Thence B there will be no visible object of zero visibility (here) or non-world (beyond) or both combined (i.e., the world); by reason of all of which you are conceived as the visible subjectivity of the world.
N.B. I am the subjectivity of the world (i.e. that part of the world that is missing)
The eye is the polarity of the world (the visible eye is au ______ du monde)
Whence by you, B, the seen shall be merely seen
Thence, B, there will not be that in the world by reason of which you are perceived and conceived as possessor or subjectivity of the world (i.e. the world is perceived and conceived as yours)
Thence, B, you will not be engaged in the world (since there will be neither you nor the world)
Thence, B, you will not locate yourself here, or there, or in between

Thence, B, there will not be that whereby you are perceived
Thence, B, there will not be that wherein you are conceived

The eye is a determinate partial structure (as is also the world).
The total structure is indeterminate, i.e. a contradiction (attá).
[The contradiction being, precisely, that the determinate, and therefore impermanent, structure is permanent]
The eye is negative náma-rúpa (yena -- loko) (tena -- tattha) (perception -- conception)
Perception and conception (determinate) become the Perceiver and the Conceiver in the contradiction -- i.e. the former are the condition (tena/tattha) for the latter.

Rúpa is the (arahat's) non-world.
Cakkhu is the distortion of this (polarization).
Cakkhuviññánam is the world (a matter of degree).






Back to Ñánavíra Thera Dhamma Page





Footnotes:

[1] but r-g-r without r given, itself is r (i.e. asserted by itself) [Back to text]

[2] S.'s 'self' is an 'itself', not a 'myself' -- an objective 'self' instead of a subjective 'self'. A mere negative is not enough. [Back to text]

[3] Not necessarily future or even temporal. [Back to text]