deepbluehum wrote: Virgo wrote:
deepbluehum wrote:There's no dualism in the suttas. Theravada spawned some faulty isms.
Well our opinions definitely differ then. But to me it's not a big deal.
I'm saying you can't produce any evidence of dualism in the Pali. The Buddhist path is pure nondualism from beginning to end. Bollux what commentator X had to say.
Well there is a lot of evidence. For example, all phenomena are either nama or rupa. Nama is of two kinds, citta and cetasika. There are 121 kinds of citta or 89 kinds, depending on how they are classified. There are 52 types of cetasikas. There are 28 kind of rupas, which are the 4 primary rupa, the primary dhatus or elements, and the 24 derived rupas. There is also nibbana, another paramattha dhamma, which is a form of nama (it is not beyong the dualism of nama and rupa). According to the Abhidhamma, there is nothing else which exists at all, on an "ultimate" level. However, these things are impacted by the 24 Paccaya, conditions, and so forth. That is how I understand it to be.
The Abhidhamma, it is traditionally said, was taught by the Buddha originally (and after that by Sariputra). Whether this is true or not is hard to determine. However, I personally believe that at the least, it was taught by Aryans. So there is no need to try to descredit it.
Many Suttas talk about the substance dualism. For example, the Susima Sutta
states:"Do you see that from consciousness as a requisite condition there is mentality and materiality?" "Yes, lord."
This is just one example of DO being taught in the Suttas. The substance dualism is clear, no?
In the Malunkyaputta Sutta
it is said:"Then, Malunkyaputta, with regard to phenomena to be seen, heard, sensed, or cognized: In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen. In reference to the heard, only the heard. In reference to the sensed, only the sensed. In reference to the cognized, only the cognized. That is how you should train yourself. When for you there will be only the seen in reference to the seen, only the heard in reference to the heard, only the sensed in reference to the sensed, only the cognized in reference to the cognized, then, Malunkyaputta, there is no you in connection with that. When there is no you in connection with that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder nor between the two. This, just this, is the end of stress."
This is an example of an instruction on vipassana. It deals with physical phenomena sensed by mental phenomena. The Buddha explains to the monk that when he understands that what is seen is only the seen, heard only the heard, senses, only the sensed, etc., and that when this is understood, it will be understood that there is no "you" there.
Why is that? Because it will be understood by the consciousness that arises in the being conventionally called "Malunkyaputta" that the phsyical objects seen, and the consciousness that sees them, as that moment happens, is all that there is. There is no person, and nothing beyond this substance dualism which has a relationship.