Stian Gudmundsen Høiland"Not translating. More poetic. "I’m sure your translation would be more poetic than the automatic one I got:"All ears while listening,It's all over the body,It's all about hatred when it comes to time,Laughter makes your body happy."Stian Gudmundsen HøilandNice. Reminds me of something Mason said once, but which I can’t find right now.Also reminds me of something Nyananada said:*“The word tajjo comes from tat + ja. Tat means ‘that [itself]’. It is the root ofsuch important words as tādī and tammaya. So tatja means ‘arisen out of thatitself’. What is samannāhāra? You might remember that, in the Caṅkī Sutta,the Buddha happens to see the Kāpaṭhika Brahmin youth. There we find theword upasaṃharati along with samannāhāra, referring to a sort of focusingthat may have not been planned – a chance meeting of eye to eye.Samannāhāra (āharati = brings) refers to a certain ‘bringing together’.“So tajjo samannāhāra points to the fact that this ‘bringing together’ of thenecessary factors for the arising of consciousness is inherent to the situationitself. It is unique to the situation, and does not come from within a person orfrom the outside. It is not exerted by oneself or an external agent: somethought that there is an ātman inside who is in charge, while others said that itis a God that injects consciousness into the man. Letting go of all theseextremes, Ven. Sāriputta Thera pointed out the crucial role of tajjosamannāhāra with his analysis of the three possibilities.”And then Bhante falls silent, and looks on with a smile.After a few moments, he asks: “What do you hear?”There is a bird singing in the distance.“Did it start singing only now?”It probably had started earlier (and now that I am listening to the tapes as Itranscribe this, I know that it had started many minutes earlier).“It must have been singing all this while, but only now...” I say.“Only now...?”“Only now did the attention went there.”“There you have tajjo samannāhāra! So is it only because of the sound of the bird that you heard it? Didn’t you hear it only after I stopped talking? Therecould be other reasons too: had there been louder noises, you may not haveheard it. So we see that it is circumstantial. That is why we mentioned in ourwritings: everything is circumstantial; nothing is substantial.”Please allow me to interject here and add that the last sentence would remainsomething that I’ll always cherish from these interviews. Not only because ofthe simple profundity of the statement or the nice little practical experimentthat led up to it, but also because of the gentle kindness in the way it wasuttered.“The attention that is present in a situation is to be understood as havingarisen out of the circumstances. If there is anything of value in the Paṭṭḥāna,that would be here, in its analysis of the 24 causes. I can’t say for certain, butit may well be an attempt at systematising the general concept mentioned inthis sutta: how a thought is connected to another. Since it is impossible toexplain this mechanism by breaking it apart with words, Ven. Sāriputta Therasays it is circumstantial – unique to the situation itself.Stian Gudmundsen HøilandHere is what Mason wrote:> We think our smile or our frown has some kind of metaphysical significance.But it's all bullshit.> When the conditions for smiling are there, then smiling is there.> When the conditions for frowning are there, then frowning.And:> When the conditions for seeing the world as a joke are there, the world isjoke.> When the conditions for seeing the world as a horrible cycle of suffering arethere, then the world is a horrible cycle of sufferingJohn Tan"Smiling" and "frowning" should also not be taken as a "then" consequence of conditions as presented in the sevenfold reasoning of Chandra, hence, orignating dependently without establishment.
When listening to the rain drops and roaring thunder, feeling the intimacy:
Not translating. More poetic.