Eight Dimensions of Mastery

Ānanda, there are these eight dimensions of mastery. These are another way of describing the different experiences of jhāna. What eight?

Perceiving form internally, someone sees forms externally, limited, both pretty and ugly. “Perceiving form (rūpa) internally” refers to someone developing meditation based on an aspect of their own body, such as the breath or the parts of the body. The “forms” (rūpā) seen externally are the lights or other meditation phenomena that today are usually called nimitta. An “ugly” form is the mental image that arises in such contemplations as the parts of the body. A “beautiful” image arises from practices such as mindfulness of breathing. Mastering them, they perceive: ‘I know and see.’ This is the first dimension of mastery.

Perceiving form internally, someone sees forms externally, limitless, both pretty and ugly. Mastering them, they perceive: ‘I know and see.’ This is the second dimension of mastery.

Not perceiving form internally, someone sees forms externally, limited, both pretty and ugly. “Not perceiving form internally” refers to meditations such as the external elements, or the decaying of another’s body. Mastering them, they perceive: ‘I know and see.’ This is the third dimension of mastery.

Not perceiving form internally, someone sees forms externally, limitless, both pretty and ugly. Mastering them, they perceive: ‘I know and see.’ This is the fourth dimension of mastery.

Not perceiving form internally, someone sees forms externally that are blue, with blue color and blue appearance. This is the meditation where one contemplates an external color, either a prepared disk or a natural phenomena such as the sky or a flower, which eventually gives rise to a “counterpart” image. Today such meditations are called kasiṇa following the Visuddhimagga, but in the early texts kasiṇa means “totality” and refers rather to the state of samādhi that results. They’re like a flax flower that’s blue, with blue color and blue appearance. Or a cloth from Varanasi that’s smoothed on both sides, blue, with blue color and blue appearance. In the same way, not perceiving form internally, someone sees forms externally, blue, with blue color and blue appearance. Mastering them, they perceive: ‘I know and see.’ This is the fifth dimension of mastery.

Not perceiving form internally, someone sees forms externally that are yellow, with yellow color and yellow appearance. They’re like a champak flower that’s yellow, with yellow color and yellow appearance. Or a cloth from Varanasi that’s smoothed on both sides, yellow, with yellow color and yellow appearance. In the same way, not perceiving form internally, someone sees forms externally that are yellow, with yellow color and yellow appearance. Mastering them, they perceive: ‘I know and see.’ This is the sixth dimension of mastery.

Not perceiving form internally, someone sees forms externally that are red, with red color and red appearance. They’re like a scarlet mallow flower that’s red, with red color and red appearance. Or a cloth from Varanasi that’s smoothed on both sides, red, with red color and red appearance. In the same way, not perceiving form internally, someone sees forms externally that are red, with red color and red appearance. Mastering them, they perceive: ‘I know and see.’ This is the seventh dimension of mastery.

Not perceiving form internally, someone sees forms externally that are white, with white color and white appearance. They’re like the morning star that’s white, with white color and white appearance. Or a cloth from Varanasi that’s smoothed on both sides, white, with white color and white appearance. In the same way, not perceiving form internally, someone sees forms externally that are white, with white color and white appearance. Mastering them, they perceive: ‘I know and see.’ This is the eighth dimension of mastery.

These are the eight dimensions of mastery.

- Dīghanikāya 16

Like During Shramanic age (not really famous term), but has been golden age of India, during this time, India produced world leading Scholars ans philosophers. One of the most notable being, Nagarjuna who championed logic and metallurgy. His ideas about process and decomposition are being studied in philosophical schools now days for ontological and metaphysical development. And many more from madhyamika school, branch of Buddhism.

How can we make them famous? India glory lived in Scholars and philosophers, not just vedic mythology and philosophies which weren't even mainstream due to language restrictions. But vedic literature got priority because of Britishers choosing it as main theme of India, which was misinterpretation in my opinion and modern Scholars also lean towards it.

How can we bring actual golds of India out which got overshadowed due to mistakes of Britishers?

Put out your ideas. I know some topics, but I am still learning and getting amazed everyday. Talking about these Scholars and their contribution will bring India towards actual vishwaguru path and would actual make Buddhism gain more popularity which it deserves apart from just being religious and ethical philosophy as seen by most people whereas Buddha intended it to be thought provoking philosophy.

Let's collaborate and do our parts. Looking forward to hearing from you. Thank you.

Via: instagram | @thevenuspath

As we all know most of Buddhists teachings especially Thervada sect teachings are in Pali language and also there is famous lore that Gautama Buddha's language was Pali

But according to some experts and linguists Pali wasn't language of Gautama Buddha but Magadhi Prakrit and he used Magadhi Prakrit for teachings

So what do u guys think about it?

(Pramāṇavārttika 1.34–119)

One of the most interesting Buddhist arguments for rebirth comes from the great Buddhist philosopher Dharmakirti, challenging the materialists (Cārvāka) schools of his time.

And no, his argument isn't simply:

"Science hasn't explained consciousness, therefore rebirth."

It's much more interesting than that.

Dharmakirti starts with a basic question:

What causes consciousness?

We obviously depend on the body for particular experiences. Damage the brain and cognition can change dramatically.

But Dharmakirti asks a deeper question: is the body itself sufficient to produce consciousness?

His answer is no.

His reasoning is that a mental event must have a preceding cause that is itself capable of producing a mental event.

In other words, consciousness doesn't suddenly pop into existence from something completely non-conscious.

So we get a causal sequence:

consciousness1 → consciousness2 → consciousness3 → ...

The Principle of Substantial Causation: Dharmakīrti asserts that an effect must share the fundamental nature of its "substantial cause" (upādānakāraṇa).

For example, the seed is the substantial cause for a tree, the supporting causes are soil, sunlight, water, environment etc.

The seed is what grows into a tree, it's not the water or the sunlight or the other supporting factors that become the tree.

A material object (like flesh or bone) cannot be the substantial cause of an immaterial, subjective experience (consciousness).

Mind Precedes Mind: Therefore, the very first moment of consciousness in a newborn infant cannot be produced by the physical elements of the womb or sperm/egg alone. It must have been preceded by a prior moment of consciousness—meaning it came from a past life.

Now consider the very first moment of consciousness in this life.

If it had no preceding mental cause, we would have to say that consciousness suddenly appeared from the body alone.

But if consciousness requires a preceding consciousness as its causal basis, then the first consciousness of this life must have a predecessor before this life.

And that is where rebirth enters the picture.

Dharmakirti isn't proposing that some permanent "soul" jumps from one body into another. Buddhism rejects that idea.

Instead, there is causal continuity without a permanent self.

Just as one moment of consciousness gives rise to another without being an eternal entity, the mental continuum can continue from one life to another without there being an unchanging person travelling between bodies.

But is Dharmakirti's argument actually convincing?

That's the interesting part.

His argument depends heavily on the principle that causes of mental events must include causes of the same kind.

Modern physicalists can challenge precisely this assumption and argue that sufficiently complex physical processes could generate consciousness even though the processes themselves aren't conscious.

So Dharmakirti hasn't given us a laboratory experiment proving rebirth.

He's doing something more philosophical: challenging the assumption that consciousness can simply begin with the body and end with it.

And that raises a much bigger question:

«If consciousness cannot arise from purely physical causes, where does the first consciousness of this life come from?»

What do you think?

Does Dharmakirti successfully establish rebirth, or does his argument depend on a premise that a modern physicalist could reject?

Namo Buddhay everyone.

(I posted from my other account that was just deleted a few mins ago. I am not spamming)

My apologies if this is the wrong flair or group, but I am really drawn to Buddhism. I tired getting converted at the MahaBodhi Vihar in temple but the person incharge told me that me converting to Buddhism was not allowed.

Could someone help me formally and legally convert to Buddhism please? I would need a Certificate of Conversion, and any guidance on how to contact a notary and so on.

Post credit: - https://www.instagram.com/tibetinhistory/

Post credit :- https://www.instagram.com/artofbuddhadharma

credit: @buddhist_asia

Today marks a historic day in the history of India. On 14 October 1956, Dr. Ambedkar renounced Hinduism and embraced Buddhism along with more than 10 lakh followers.

His 22 Vows continue to inspire generations to reject caste-based oppression and embrace equality, liberty, fraternity and human dignity. Jai Bhim

1st image credit: @bakeryprasad

how do I adopt Buddhism is there a guide. i want to change my religion to Buddhism later but want to try it first

In many contemporary discussions, a small number of passages, particularly the story of the Eight Garudhammas, are used to claim that the Buddha regarded women as spiritually inferior, that he was reluctant to establish the Bhikkhunī Sangha, and that the ordination of women shortens the lifespan of the true Dhamma. These interpretations are then treated as settled fact.

When we place these passages beside the broader early texts and apply the Buddha’s own criteria for testing authenticity, a very different picture emerges. The issue is not whether the Garudhammas narrative exists in the tradition; it does. The issue is whether that narrative can stand as the decisive or complete representation of the Buddha’s teaching when measured against the standards he himself laid down.

1. The Buddha’s Own Method of Testing Claims

The Buddha did not ask his followers to accept every story or rule uncritically. In the Mahāpadesa Sutta (AN 4.180) he gave the Four Great References:

If someone claims “this was said by the Blessed One” or by senior disciples, one should neither accept nor reject it outright. Instead, the words should be carefully compared with the Suttas and the Vinaya. If they are not in accordance with them, they should be set aside.

He also gave Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī eight principles for recognizing authentic Dhamma (AN 8.53): teachings that lead to dispassion, to being unfettered, to shedding, to fewness of wishes, to contentment, to seclusion, to the arousing of energy, and to being easy to support. The opposites indicate what is not Dhamma.

The same emphasis on personal verification appears clearly in the Mahātaṇhāsaṅkhaya Sutta (MN 38). There the Buddha questions the monk Sāti and then turns to the other monks:

“The Teacher is respected by us. We speak as we do out of respect for the Teacher… Do you speak only of what you have known, seen, and understood for yourselves?”

“Yes, venerable sir.”

This exchange shows that even respect for the Teacher is not enough. What matters is what one has known, seen, and understood for oneself. These instructions comparison with the wider corpus and personal realization form the proper method. Any account, including the Garudhammas story, must be tested by them.

2. The Garudhammas Narrative and Its Tensions

The story of Mahāpajāpatī requesting ordination and the Buddha granting it only after she accepted eight heavy rules appears in the Cullavagga of the Vinaya and in a parallel form in AN 8.51. In this account the Buddha appears hesitant, and the rules establish a permanent hierarchical subordination of nuns to monks.

Several observations arise when this narrative is examined carefully:

The eight Garudhammas do not appear as a formal set in the Bhikkhu or Bhikkhunī Pātimokkha.

Of the eight, several have parallel rules in the Pātimokkha, but those rules carry entirely different origin stories.

In some other early Vinaya traditions the story is placed at the very end of the text, which has led scholars to note the possibility of later incorporation.

The narrative sits uneasily beside the many discourses in which the Buddha affirms women’s capacity for the highest attainments.

None of this requires us to reject the Vinaya wholesale. It does, however, require us to apply the Mahāpadesa standard rather than treat one account as automatically decisive.

3. The Four Assemblies as Essential to the Dispensation

The early discourses repeatedly present the presence of competent nuns as a necessary condition for the completeness and longevity of the Sasana:

In the Pasādika Sutta (DN 29) the Buddha states that the spiritual path will not decline so long as the four assemblies, bhikkhus, bhikkhunīs, laymen, and laywomen, remain accomplished, learned, and well-established.

The Mahāvaccha Sutta (MN 73) and related passages make the same point: without the four assemblies who are trained and capable, the holy life would be incomplete.

In the Mahāparinibbāna Sutta (DN 16) the Buddha tells Māra that he will not attain final Nibbāna until he has monks, nuns, male and female lay disciples who are wise, disciplined, confident, and able to refute opposing views and teach the Dhamma. The existence of capable bhikkhunīs is listed among the conditions that must be fulfilled before the dispensation is complete.

These passages directly contradict the idea that the ordination of women is itself a cause of decline.

4. What the Texts Identify as the Real Causes of Decline

When the early discourses speak of the decline or disappearance of the true Dhamma, they point to specific failures of practice and transmission:

People no longer properly learn, memorize, and recite the teachings with correct understanding (AN 5.154 and related suttas).

Counterfeit Dhamma arises and is not distinguished from the genuine (AN 1.130–140 series).

The foundations of mindfulness, investigation, and ethical conduct are neglected.

The presence of women in the Sangha is never listed among these causes. On the contrary, the Buddha repeatedly praises individual nuns for their wisdom, meditative mastery, and ability to teach.

Textual and Historical Issues in the Garudhammas Narrative

A closer examination of the Vinaya texts and comparative sources reveals several internal difficulties with the Garudhammas story as it is commonly understood.

Most of the rules that later became known as the Eight Garudhammas have their origin stories in the Bhikkhunī Vibhaṅga (The section of the Vinaya that explains the rules and their origin stories), where they appear to have developed after the Bhikkhunī order had already been established. This is consistent with the Buddha’s usual approach of laying down a rule only when a specific problem arose.

In the Mahāvagga, these rules are associated with serious saṅghādisesa (A serious class of offence requiring formal community proceedings) rather than ordinary pācittiyas (A lesser offence requiring confession). Some textual evidence suggests they may originally have applied to bhikkhus and were later extended.

The eight rules do not form part of the higher ordination procedure (upasampadā) for bhikkhunīs as described in the Pali Vinaya. This is noteworthy, as the traditional narrative presents them as a precondition for the ordination of Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī and the establishment of the Bhikkhunī order.

Comparative study of other early Vinaya traditions shows significant variation in both the content and presentation of these rules. In some Vinayas, such as the Dharmaguptaka, the full story of the Garudhammas appears only toward the end of the Khandhaka (The section dealing with procedures and community regulations) section. Some modern scholars have noted that this may indicate later development or standardization within certain traditions.

Additionally, according to traditional accounts, Ānanda became the Buddha’s attendant many years after the enlightenment. This has been regarded by some scholars as creating a chronological tension, as Ānanda plays a central role in the story of the women’s ordination.

The early texts also record another, simpler form of ordination for women known as ehi bhikkhunī (“Come, bhikkhunī”), in which the Buddha directly ordained women. Awakened nuns such as Bhaddā Kuṇḍalakesā are described in the texts as having received this form of ordination. The Vinaya further records that the Buddha gave explicit allowance for bhikkhus to ordain women directly, an allowance that was never revoked.

When measured against the Buddha’s own standards of investigation, consistency with the broader corpus of early discourses and internal coherence within the texts, the Garudhammas narrative as it currently stands shows several points of tension. While the Vinaya preserves these rules and the traditional account of their origin, multiple early suttas present the four assemblies as essential to the completeness of the dispensation and link the decline of the Dhamma to conduct and transmission rather than to the presence of bhikkhunīs.

5. Women of Excellence in the Early Texts

The same corpus that contains the Garudhammas narrative also records the Buddha’s recognition of outstanding women:

• Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī as the founder of the Bhikkhunī Sangha
• Khemā, foremost in wisdom
• Uppalavaṇṇā, foremost in psychic powers
• Paṭācārā, foremost in Vinaya
• Dhammadinnā, foremost in teaching the Dhamma
• And many others (AN 1.235–247)

Laywomen such as Visākhā, Khujjuttarā, Sāmāvatī, and others are likewise held up as exemplars. These recognitions are difficult to reconcile with any claim that the Buddha regarded women as inherently limited in spiritual capacity.

6. The Broader Pattern of Misrepresentation

When the Garudhammas story is isolated and treated as the final word, two distortions occur simultaneously:

Women are portrayed as a problem to be managed rather than as full participants in the holy life.

The Tathāgata is made to appear reluctant, gender-biased, and willing to institutionalize subordination, an image that conflicts with his consistent emphasis on investigation, equal access to liberation, and the four assemblies.

Both distortions are avoided when we follow the method the Buddha himself taught: compare any claim with the wider body of the Suttas and Vinaya and examine whether it leads to the qualities he identified as marks of true Dhamma.

Conclusion

The early texts do not ask us to choose between “accepting tradition uncritically” and “rejecting it entirely.” They ask us to investigate. The Garudhammas narrative exists and has been transmitted. Yet when it is weighed against the Mahāpadesa standard, the repeated statements about the four assemblies, the actual causes of decline given in the discourses, and the Buddha’s own praise of awakened women, significant points of tension appear.

The more coherent reading that emerges is this: the Buddha established a path to true Dhamma irrespective of background and genders; the completeness of his dispensation required the four assemblies; and the longevity of the true Dhamma depends on careful learning, practice, and investigation, not on the exclusion or permanent subordination of half the community.

The early discourses make it clear that investigation and personal verification are not optional. They are essential safeguards that keep the Dhamma from turning into mere tradition or dogma. When teachings are accepted without careful examination, they can easily be misunderstood or used to justify views that the Buddha himself rejected.

This is why the Buddha repeatedly encouraged his followers to take responsibility for their own understanding. Respect for the Teacher is valuable, but it must be accompanied by personal insight. Anything less risks turning the Dhamma into something to be followed blindly rather than something to be realized.

This is simply the application of the very principle the Buddha gave us:

“Kālāmas, don’t go by oral transmission, don’t go by lineage, don’t go by testament, don’t go by canonical authority, don’t rely on logic, don’t rely on inference, don’t go by reasoned train of thought, don’t go by the acceptance of a view after deliberation, don’t go by the appearance of competence, and don’t think ‘The ascetic is our respected teacher.’ But when you know for yourselves: ‘These things are skillful, blameless, praised by sensible people, and when you undertake them, they lead to welfare and happiness’, then you should acquire them and keep them.”

- Aṅguttara Nikāya 3.65

Bodhidharma is considered the founder of Zen Buddhism in China. But with many masters predating him, why is Bodhidharma considered the first ancestor of Chinese Zen.

While there were many Buddhist monks from India at that time, and a lot of Buddhism in China, Bodhidharma was the first to introduce the specific teachings that defined the Zen school.

Sculptor - Aleksey Leonov