Posted 27 May 2006 - 04:01 AM
“This Dhamma is for one who enjoys non-complication, who delights in non-complication, not for one who enjoys & delights in complication.”'
I looked up the pali of this sentence:
“nippapancaramassayam dhammo nippapancaratino nayam dhammo papancaramassa papancarintino”
What do you think the Buddha meant by complication and non-complication? I once heard someone –referring to this sutta- say this meant people should not think too much because this complicates things and takes people away from the present moment. And in a superficial way there is something in this. But we can always learn more.
Complication in this sutta is the English translation for papanca. There are three papanca – tanha (desire), ditthi(view) and mana (conceit). (see netti pakarana paragraph 203, 204).These three are said to prolong samasara vata , the round of births and deaths. And now we may want to understand what the Buddha mean by tanha, for example? The Buddha took four incalculably long periods of time plus one hundred thousand aeons to develop the wisdom to become a Buddha . We don’t have to develop parami to the extent of a Buddha but it still takes a long, long time. We might hope that we are the developed ones who have so much parami already but this is just tanha, one of the papanca, or we may be sure we are ones who already have great parami, but this is mana, another papanca, a prolonger of samasara.
Posted 11 March 2007 - 07:35 PM
About the mulapariyaya sutta: For this explanation I rely on the commentary translated by Bhikkhu Bodhi as well as his introduction. Bhikkhun Bodhi writes:
The commentary says that mannana is a synonym for papanca (see my letter about this a few months back). This is interesting as papanca is of three types: tanha, mana and ditthi (desire, conceit and craving). Now, as I understand it papanca is at a far deeper level than just the developed thinking Bodhi seems to indicate above. However , in other sections of his introduction he seems to acknowledge this. For instance he has a note which says "it cannot be stressed strongly enogh that the ..basic structure of ego bias is already present in toto as a potential in the worldlings mental constitution". And in another section he relates mannana to the vipallasa (the perversions of cognition). He notes that there are three levels of perversion: perception (sanna) citta, and views (ditthi). He says "the perversion of perception occurs when the object is simply noted through one of the four distortional frames without further development. (this is the deepest level). If the object is subsequently reflected upon in the same mode there takes palce a perversion of thought. And if, through repeated reflection, the conviction arises that this frame yields an accurate picture of the world, the distortion has evolved into a pereversion of views." The four perversions are seeing the foul as beautiful, the unpleasuarable to be pleasuarable, the impermanent to be permanent and the not self to be self. Thus he acknowledges that these perversions (and mannana ) are also present before any thinking in words.
Posted 11 March 2007 - 07:38 PM
I was looking for a different discourse (addressing contention for the things of the world) when I ran across this one. I'd read it before, but had forgotten its unusual emphasis on papa~nca and its place in paticcasamuppada. Having recently experienced more than my share of papa~nca, I thought I'd pass this along. I loved Stick-In- Hand the Brahmin's response. I think I remember reading somewhere that 'Stick-In-Hand's' name did NOT refer to a walking-stick. I think this is an example of the Buddha matching his teaching to the (contentious, in this case) character of his audience.
Majjhima Nikaya 18
Posted 11 March 2007 - 07:42 PM
Is there not a difference between the papanca (proliferations) which I assume are being referred to in the sutta (i.e getting lost in concepts with wrong views) and realizing that the Teachings are very profound and intricate and that the development of understanding is not a simple matter at all?
The following sutta has been quoted before, but let me repeat an extract as a reminder of this:
Samyutta Nikaya XX.7 Ani Sutta The Peg;
"In this way the disappearance of the discourses that are words of the Tathagata -- deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness -- will come about. "Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata -- deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness -- are being recited. We will lend ear, will set our hearts on knowing them, will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering.' That's how you should train yourselves."
Best wishes, Sarah
Posted 18 November 2013 - 06:12 PM
A good explaining of papanca by Ven. Thanissaro Bhikkhu:
The Arrows of Thinking: Papañca & the path to end conflict, by Thanissaro Bhikkhu (2012; 8pp./44KB) When discussing the sources of conflict—inner and outer—the Buddha pointed to a type of thinking he called papañca. This term is often translated as “conceptual proliferation,” but a survey of how it’s discussed in the Pali Canon shows that it has less to do with the amount of thinking and more with the way thinking is framed. This is an extract from daylong course, given in the IMC of the Mid-Peninsula, California, USA on 28. April 2012 which focus on understanding what papañca is, how it happens, when it has its uses, and how the need for it can eventually be overcome.
A audio file of the full talk is avaliable on audiodhamma.org.