සොතාපත්ති ඵල සූත්‍රය

[Emios]

Ananda theroth sakman karala karala epa wela,aye adata gihin alaweddi tamai rahat une,

 

[ek_rosh]

I assume you are referring to something like applying the Pythagorean theorem, which make sense because it is very specific - meaning that the conditions are static. a² + b² = c² always true for right-angled triangles. So if you know this as knowledge and if someone tells you "this is a right-angled triangle" you can verify that using your knowledge (Pythagorean theorem in this case) that it is actually a right-angled triangle (or not). I do get this point but I don't think we can grasp the theorem like we do for the Pythagorean theorem when it comes to dhamma. But again this is what I think, knowing what I know... there is no way.

not sure if you got what i said. there won't be verification for the music experience. but the path to get there is still lawkika and can be verified.

think of like this:

you have 100s of difference performances infront of you and many of them offer relaxing, calm feeling and other things you said. Which one would you select and how do you know which one would end end up with the result you want?

---

ඉතිං ඊට පස්සෙ? ....
නැත්තං එච්චරද?
------ Post added on Aug 6, 2026 at 6:59 AM

anapanasagti -> satipattana -> 7 bojjangas -> vipassana nyanas -> gothrabu citta -> magga cita - > pala citta
------ Post added on Aug 6, 2026 at 9:05 AM

 

[nuwan9999]

not sure if you got what i said. there won't be verification for the music experience. but the path to get there is still lawkika and can be verified.

think of like this:

you have 100s of difference performances infront of you and many of them offer relaxing, calm feeling and other things you said. Which one would you select and how do you know which one would end end up with the result you want?

For me it is like this,

• I select the first one (based on the things I mentioned) but not fully satisfied... still want to listen more,
• then I listen to second one, then finds out its not as good -> stay listening to first one,
• then listen to 3rd one and finds out 3rd one is much better. Leave the first and now listening to 3rd, but still not satisfied.
• Now I get to listen to 4th one... not good... leave it and stay at 3rd one... not satisfied.
• Then listen to 5th one, now I feel like I don't want to listen to anything else. I am now fully satisfied with what I am hearing.

I stop searching for new music... I don't care if there are better music out there or not... I am fully satisfied.

 

[ek_rosh]

For me it is like this,

• I select the first one (based on the things I mentioned) but not fully satisfied... still want to listen more,
• then I listen to second one, then finds out its not as good -> stay listening to first one,
• then listen to 3rd one and finds out 3rd one is much better. Leave the first and now listening to 3rd, but still not satisfied.
• Now I get to listen to 4th one... not good... leave it and stay at 3rd one... not satisfied.
• Then listen to 5th one, now I feel like I don't want to listen to anything else. I am now fully satisfied with what I am hearing.

I stop searching for new music... I don't care if there are better music out there or not... I am fully satisfied.

what criteria are you using to determine if you are fully satisfied? in other words, what needs to be checked in that to be fully satisfied?

 

[nuwan9999]

what criteria are you using to determine if you are fully satisfied? in other words, what needs to be checked in that to be fully satisfied?

No criteria, totally based on the feeling, like this:
I am hungry:

• I drink some water, feels little better but not enough
• then eat some nuts, better than before but still not enough
• have a tea with biscuits, better than before but still hungry
• eat a big plate of rice and curry then have some curd and treacle for dessert

Now I am fully satisfied, I don't want to eat anything else

 

[ek_rosh]

No criteria, totally based on the feeling, like this:
I am hungry:

• I drink some water, feels little better but not enough
• then eat some nuts, better than before but still not enough
• have a tea with biscuits, better than before but still hungry
• eat a big plate of rice and curry then have some curd and treacle for dessert

Now I am fully satisfied, I don't want to eat anything else

even if you think the satisfaction comes purely from feeling, it is not.

the feeling is never free floating. it always arises from some kind of internal criteria, even if you dont consciously notice..

In your example, the mind is quietly evaluating with for ex.. hunger level, taste satisfaction, fullness, comfort, craving completion, emotional soothing..etc. these are the criteria and if one or more of them arent met (according to whats important to you), you dont feel fully satisfied.

the same goes when listening to damma. the mind performs an internal evaluation based on criteria like whether the teaching reduces confusion, aligns with personal experience, reduces anger, feels useful, etc.

there is no satisfaction without comparison/criteria. in shrot to be satisfied you need that thing to be in certain way. thats the truth. so, what criteria (certain way) does your mind use to feel satisfied when listening to dhamma?

 

[nuwan9999]

even if you think the satisfaction comes purely from feeling, it is not.

the feeling is never free floating. it always arises from some kind of internal criteria, even if you dont consciously notice..

In your example, the mind is quietly evaluating with for ex.. hunger level, taste satisfaction, fullness, comfort, craving completion, emotional soothing..etc. these are the criteria and if one or more of them arent met (according to whats important to you), you dont feel fully satisfied.

the same goes when listening to damma. the mind performs an internal evaluation based on criteria like whether the teaching reduces confusion, aligns with personal experience, reduces anger, feels useful, etc.

there is no satisfaction without comparison/criteria. in shrot to be satisfied you need that thing to be in certain way. thats the truth. so, what criteria (certain way) does your mind use to feel satisfied when listening to dhamma?

You have to take that example for that purpose only, if you are talking about food craving, sure I agree with you, but don't take it that way. Take it as you filling in a glass with water. Once its full, there is no way you can add any more water to it. Similarly, in that example, I am fully satisfied means I can't have food again physically (don't get the mental factor here).

If we come to dhamma side, this doesn't mean what I know is the correct dhamma, and everyone else is wrong. It may or may not be the case. The fact is that the dhamma I know filled me in without any space left for something different, so I don't need to search anymore.

Are you with me?

 

[ek_rosh]

You have to take that example for that purpose only, if you are talking about food craving, sure I agree with you, but don't take it that way. Take it as you filling in a glass with water. Once its full, there is no way you can add any more water to it. Similarly, in that example, I am fully satisfied means I can't have food again physically (don't get the mental factor here).

If we come to dhamma side, this doesn't mean what I know is the correct dhamma, and everyone else is wrong. It may or may not be the case. The fact is that the dhamma I know filled me in without any space left for something different, so I don't need to search anymore.

Are you with me?

I understand your filling part. But, that filling/satisfaction is purely a mental component. It is the same for dhamma food or anything. There is no satisfaction without the mental component. Do you agree?

 

[Blair Solari]

I assume you are referring to something like applying the Pythagorean theorem, which make sense because it is very specific - meaning that the conditions are static. a² + b² = c² always true for right-angled triangles. So if you know this as knowledge and if someone tells you "this is a right-angled triangle" you can verify that using your knowledge (Pythagorean theorem in this case) that it is actually a right-angled triangle (or not). I do get this point but I don't think we can grasp the theorem like we do for the Pythagorean theorem when it comes to dhamma. But again this is what I think, knowing what I know... there is no way.

---

ඉතිං ඊට පස්සෙ? ....
නැත්තං එච්චරද?
------ Post added on Aug 6, 2026 at 6:59 AM

ඕකට මන් උදා. කියන්නම්.

ඉස්සර බුධිසම් වලට උගන්නනවා මතකයි, ත්‍රිලක්ෂණය පෙන්නන්න, කාර් එකක් උදා. අරන්, කෑලි වලට ගලවලා, කෑලි වලට ගැලෙව්වහම කාර් එකක් නැහැ, කාර් එක ඇතුළු හැම දේම කාලෙත් එක්ක කැඩෙනවා, හැප්පෙනවා.. වගේ.

මඤ්ඤණාවක්නේ..

කාර් එක.. කියන අවස්ථාවේ පේන, දැනෙන, ඇහෙන පන්චස්කන්ධ එක්ස්පීරියන්ස් එක ගන්න. අන්න එතන තියෙන unstable, conditioned ස්වභාවය, අනිත්‍ය, අනාත්ම, දුක්ඛ ස්වභාවය නේ දකින්න ඕනේ.

---

වැරදි msg එක quote වුනේ.

මේකට ර්ප්ලයි කරේ...

if you take anapana sati

mannana - breath is mine, im meditating, my breath, can there be breath.. - all the imaginations
nana/nuwana - knowing the start of breath, end of breath, etc...
visesha nyana/nuwana (prajna) - seeing anicca dukka anatta

no mannana in anapana sati... whole purpose of anapana sati is stopping the mannana..for yoniso to take over (later)


buddha sometimes mix and match nuwana/visheshitha nuwana depending on the context. but most places he separates them clearly..

---

visehsha nuwana (prajna), not regular nuwana - 3 mark penetration



you are not asked to see 3 marks with prutakjana perspective. anapana sati (satipattana) sets up conditions to stop mannana and allows yoniso to happen where visesha nuwana takes over.



no.

visehsa nuwana - samma ditti
------ Post added on Aug 5, 2026 at 9:21 PM

---

not sure what you mean..



nope, you dont identify the experience of the music through knowledge/sheet music. the sheet doesnt tell you how the music feels.

It tells you how the music must be constructed/performed..

some performers use five instruments... some may use six. some bring one instrument in early, others bring it in later. across those hundreds of performances every group claims THEIR version is the original.

BUT the sheet music tells you exactly, how many instruments should be used, which instruments, and the precise order in which they must enter.

that knowledge doesnt create the music experience, BUT it DOES tell you which performance will produce the original sound and which ones wont..so that you wont be suck in a performance that will never create the experience needed... this is the key you are missing.



sure, many of these performances can make listeners relaxed, calm, or happy even if they reproduce zero of the original music. if thats the purpose youare looking, for a simple enjoyment over what the composer intended from the original music, sure, the choice is yours. i dont think anybody here has any objection about your choices
------ Post added on Aug 6, 2026 at 3:19 AM

------ Post added on Aug 7, 2026 at 8:43 AM

 

[ek_rosh]

ඕකට මන් උදා. කියන්නම්.

ඉස්සර බුධිසම් වලට උගන්නනවා මතකයි, ත්‍රිලක්ෂණය පෙන්නන්න, කාර් එකක් උදා. අරන්, කෑලි වලට ගලවලා, කෑලි වලට ගැලෙව්වහම කාර් එකක් නැහැ, කාර් එක ඇතුළු හැම දේම කාලෙත් එක්ක කැඩෙනවා, හැප්පෙනවා.. වගේ.

මඤ්ඤණාවක්නේ..

කාර් එක.. කියන අවස්ථාවේ පේන, දැනෙන, ඇහෙන පන්චස්කන්ධ එක්ස්පීරියන්ස් එක ගන්න. අන්න එතන තියෙන unstable, conditioned ස්වභාවය, අනිත්‍ය, අනාත්ම, දුක්ඛ ස්වභාවය නේ දකින්න ඕනේ.

---

වැරදි msg එක quote වුනේ.

මේකට ර්ප්ලයි කරේ...

------ Post added on Aug 7, 2026 at 8:43 AM

මොන පාර්ට් එකටද බන් රිප්ලයි කලේ? මොකක් අදහස් කරන්නද?

 

[Blair Solari]

මොන පාර්ට් එකටද බන් රිප්ලයි කලේ? මොකක් අදහස් කරන්නද?

මඤ්ඤණාව, නුවණ, විශේෂ නුවණ ගැන

 

[ek_rosh]

ඕකට මන් උදා. කියන්නම්.

ඉස්සර බුධිසම් වලට උගන්නනවා මතකයි, ත්‍රිලක්ෂණය පෙන්නන්න, කාර් එකක් උදා. අරන්, කෑලි වලට ගලවලා, කෑලි වලට ගැලෙව්වහම කාර් එකක් නැහැ, කාර් එක ඇතුළු හැම දේම කාලෙත් එක්ක කැඩෙනවා, හැප්පෙනවා.. වගේ.

මඤ්ඤණාවක්නේ..

කාර් එක කැඩුවත් මන්නනාව...කාර් එකක් තිබුනෙම නැ කිව්වත් මන්නනාව...මොන ලොජික් එකක් ගෙනාවත් මන්නනාවක් තමයි

කාර් එක.. කියන අවස්ථාවේ පේන, දැනෙන, ඇහෙන පන්චස්කන්ධ එක්ස්පීරියන්ස් එක ගන්න. අන්න එතන තියෙන unstable, conditioned ස්වභාවය, අනිත්‍ය, අනාත්ම, දුක්ඛ ස්වභාවය නේ දකින්න ඕනේ.

---

------ Post added on Aug 7, 2026 at 8:43 AM

කාර් එකක් කියන එක්ස්පිරියන්ස් එකේ ත්‍රිලක්ශනය බලන්න ලේසි නැ...කාර් එක කියන මන්නනාවටම ඇවිල්ල ඉවරයි...ඒක ෆීලින් එකක්ට රෙඩියුස් කරන්න අමාරුයි..

අන්න ඒකයි හුස්ම ගැනීම වගේ එකක් ගන්නෙ...හුස්ම ගැනීම සන්නාවෙන් පටන්ගත්තත්...මේ හුස්ම ගැනීම මම හුස්ම ගැනීම කියන සන්නවෙන් ෆීලින් ලෙවල් එකට යන්න පුලුවන්..හුස්ම කියන සන්නවක් නැතිව..
කාර් එකක එහෙම කරන්න බැ..සන්නාව නැතිඋනාම යන්න උඩක් නැ.


ඔන්න ඕකමයි බන අහන ගමන් විදර්ශනා වෙන්නෙ නැත්තෙ එක්ස්ට්‍රිම්ලි ස්කිල්ෆුල් මයින්ඩ් එකකට ඇරෙන්න...ශබ්දෙ ඇහෙන්නෙම චචනෙ තේරුමත් එක්ක... ෆීලින් ලෙවල් එකට රෙඩ්යුස් කරන්න එක්ස්ට්‍රිම්ලි ඩිෆිකල්ට්...නෙක්ස්ට් ටු ඉම්පොසිබල්..

 

[nuwan9999]

I understand your filling part. But, that filling/satisfaction is purely a mental component. It is the same for dhamma food or anything. There is no satisfaction without the mental component. Do you agree?

Not in this case, take the water filled glass example, lets say for argument sake that I want to fill more water because I am not [mentally] satisfied, then I look at the glass and prove to myself "there's nothing to fill", because this is a fact. Every now and then I hear deferent things (dhamma talks etc.) from different people, but then I always refer to what I came to realization and find out there's nothing to add, remove or change there.

 

[Blair Solari]

කාර් එක කැඩුවත් මන්නනාව...කාර් එකක් තිබුනෙම නැ කිව්වත් මන්නනාව...මොන ලොජික් එකක් ගෙනාවත් මන්නනාවක් තමයි




කාර් එකක් කියන එක්ස්පිරියන්ස් එකේ ත්‍රිලක්ශනය බලන්න ලේසි නැ...කාර් එක කියන මන්නනාවටම ඇවිල්ල ඉවරයි...ඒක ෆීලින් එකක්ට රෙඩියුස් කරන්න අමාරුයි..

අන්න ඒකයි හුස්ම ගැනීම වගේ එකක් ගන්නෙ...හුස්ම ගැනීම සන්නාවෙන් පටන්ගත්තත්...මේ හුස්ම ගැනීම මම හුස්ම ගැනීම කියන සන්නවෙන් ෆීලින් ලෙවල් එකට යන්න පුලුවන්..හුස්ම කියන සන්නවක් නැතිව..
කාර් එකක එහෙම කරන්න බැ..සන්නාව නැතිඋනාම යන්න උඩක් නැ.


ඔන්න ඕකමයි බන අහන ගමන් විදර්ශනා වෙන්නෙ නැත්තෙ එක්ස්ට්‍රිම්ලි ස්කිල්ෆුල් මයින්ඩ් එකකට ඇරෙන්න...ශබ්දෙ ඇහෙන්නෙම චචනෙ තේරුමත් එක්ක... ෆීලින් ලෙවල් එකට රෙඩ්යුස් කරන්න එක්ස්ට්‍රිම්ලි ඩිෆිකල්ට්...නෙක්ස්ට් ටු ඉම්පොසිබල්..

කොහොම කිව්වත් ත්‍රිලක්ෂණය නුවණින් දැක්ම ඇරෙන්න අනිත් ඔක්කොම මන්නනාව තමයි.

ඔව්, ස්කිල්ෆුල් මයින්ඩ් එකක් ඕනේ බන අහන ගමන් තමා තුලින් විමසන්න.

මන් ඒකනේ @dilann වගේ අයට කියන්නේ අර ප්ලේලිස්ට් එක බලන්න කියලා.

ස්කිල්ෆුල් අය, ධර්මය ඇහෙද්දී, තමා තුලින් විමසලා මාර්ගඵල ලබනවා.

 

[Emios]

love/shardda/complete faith for buddha can do a 50% lift off the needed skills, that's what happen to Sunita etc. You need only a bit of practice from your side.

 

[ek_rosh]

කොහොම කිව්වත් ත්‍රිලක්ෂණය නුවණින් දැක්ම ඇරෙන්න අනිත් ඔක්කොම මන්නනාව තමයි.

නැ...

ඔව්, ස්කිල්ෆුල් මයින්ඩ් එකක් ඕනේ බන අහන ගමන් තමා තුලින් විමසන්න.

මන් ඒකනේ @dilann වගේ අයට කියන්නේ අර ප්ලේලිස්ට් එක බලන්න කියලා.

ස්කිල්ෆුල් අය, ධර්මය ඇහෙද්දී, තමා තුලින් විමසලා මාර්ගඵල ලබනවා.

ලැබුන මයින්ඩ් එක සිකිල්ෆුල් කරන්න බැ...එක භවන්ග චිත්ත සන්තතියෙ ලක්ශනයක්...ප්‍රතිසන්දියෙදි කර්මයෙන් ඇති වෙන එකක්..මුක්ත්ම කරගන්න බැරි නම් පින්ක් කරන්න කියන්නෙ ඒකයි.. ලැබුන මයින්ඩ් එක අනුවතමයි.. උග්ගටිතන්න..උපරතන්න...නෙය්ය පදපරම පුද්ගලයො ඇතිවෙන්නෙ....උබ නෙය්ය නම්...මොන මගුල කරත් උග්ගටි තන්න සික්ල එක හදන්න බැ...ඒ විදිහට බන අහන ගමන් සාක්ශාත් වෙන්නෙ නැ...ඔය සික්ල් එක හදන්න පුලුවන් එකක් නෙවේ...

---

love/shardda/complete faith for buddha can do a 50% lift off the needed skills, that's what happen to Sunita etc. You need only a bit of practice from your side.

you cant change the skill level. you can change how to use the skill you have.
------ Post added on Aug 7, 2026 at 9:13 PM

---

Not in this case, take the water filled glass example, lets say for argument sake that I want to fill more water because I am not [mentally] satisfied, then I look at the glass and prove to myself "there's nothing to fill", because this is a fact. Every now and then I hear deferent things (dhamma talks etc.) from different people, but then I always refer to what I came to realization and find out there's nothing to add, remove or change there.

thats what i said, your mind is using the glass as the criteria in this case. satisfaction depends on the level of water in the glass. What im asking is that what your glass is in dhama listening? and which measurement you used to determine if that glass (in case of damma) is filled or not?

lets say the glass has 500ml capacity. if it is 250 filled you know it is half filled. In that case you should have a pre awareness of the capacity of dhamma needed before even filling (listening)..
------ Post added on Aug 7, 2026 at 9:18 PM

 

[nuwan9999]

thats what i said, your mind is using the glass as the criteria in this case. satisfaction depends on the level of water in the glass. What im asking is that what your glass is in dhama listening? and which measurement you used to determine if that glass (in case of damma) is filled or not?

It is the sense of fulfilment, the confirmation that, there can't be anything else to challenge what was understood, the complete grasp of existence and non existence. This is of course within my mental capacity, and therefor one could argue that I could be wrong and its not the ultimate truth, but does that matter if the dhamma I came to realization gives me the answers to all my questions?

lets say the glass has 500ml capacity. if it is 250 filled you know it is half filled. In that case you should have a pre awareness of the capacity of dhamma needed before even filling (listening)..
------ Post added on Aug 7, 2026 at 9:18 PM

Once the glass is full, is the capacity of the glass relevant anymore? One can fill their glass without even knowing its actual capacity.
No one would ever know the real capacity of the the dhamma glass, you can only try to fill it and once it's full, you know about it IMHO.

 

[ek_rosh]

It is the sense of fulfilment, the confirmation that, there can't be anything else to challenge what was understood, the complete grasp of existence and non existence. This is of course within my mental capacity, and therefor one could argue that I could be wrong and its not the ultimate truth, but does that matter if the dhamma I came to realization gives me the answers to all my questions?

this is exactly what im talking about. you already defined a set of problems that must be solved for the dhamma to be considered true (fulfilling). that is your criteria... and as you said below, you already know what the real problem is (the capacity of the glass needed to be filled)

Once the glass is full, is the capacity of the glass relevant anymore? One can fill their glass without even knowing its actual capacity.
No one would ever know the real capacity of the the dhamma glass, you can only try to fill it and once it's full, you know about it IMHO.

you know when it is full... how? because your initial problems are answered. your criteria are fulfilled. so you are basically holding a set of questions that must be answered as the criteria.

if your initial questions are not answered then the glass is not filling up to full, so move on to somethig else..
am i interpreting this right?

 

[nuwan9999]

this is exactly what im talking about. you already defined a set of problems that must be solved for the dhamma to be considered true (fulfilling). that is your criteria... and as you said below, you already know what the real problem is (the capacity of the glass needed to be filled)

Hmm... not exactly... it is wrong to say that I knew the entire problem in first place, but I know something is not right, hence the search. That search lead me to the complete view of the problem, then I had the entire picture of it.

you know when it is full... how? because your initial problems are answered. your criteria are fulfilled. so you are basically holding a set of questions that must be answered as the criteria.

I know its full, simply because there is nothing for me to add to it. Also, not only my pre existing criteria is fulfilled, I know for a fact that there won't be new criteria to be fulfilled.

if your initial questions are not answered then the glass is not filling up to full, so move on to somethig else..
am i interpreting this right?

Yes, there should be answers for my initial questions at a minimum, else that means something missing right?

But I had more than just getting my initial questions answered, I also realized why those questions were there in the first place. This is for me, the glass full situation. The complete problem and answer in one package I'd say....

 

[ek_rosh]

Hmm... not exactly... it is wrong to say that I knew the entire problem in first place, but I know something is not right, hence the search. That search lead me to the complete view of the problem, then I had the entire picture of it.

I know its full, simply because there is nothing for me to add to it. Also, not only my pre existing criteria is fulfilled, I know for a fact that there won't be new criteria to be fulfilled.

Yes, there should be answers for my initial questions at a minimum, else that means something missing right?

But I had more than just getting my initial questions answered, I also realized why those questions were there in the first place. This is for me, the glass full situation. The complete problem and answer in one package I'd say....

ok, in summery

you know/feel somthing is not right
you have some questions and you are searching for answers
you find the answers and find the reasons for those questions as well
since you found the answers to the questions and the reasons for the questions, your search is complete and nothing more to search

is it something like this?