39000 From: robmoult Date: Sun Nov 28, 2004 4:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Rob K) Hi Phil, I read it with interest anyway... :-) Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "plnao" wrote: > > Hello all > > The Rob is Rob K. > > > > Hello Rob, and all > > > > Carrying on with my de-feeding of the schadenfreude beast. > > Last night I did check the headlines, and scanned a few stories, > > but felt no great interest and this morning no desire to look. > > > > > > Rob: Is there anything other than the khandhas arising when you are > > watching TV. > (snip) > > Metta, > Phil 39001 From: plnao Date: Sun Nov 28, 2004 4:33pm Subject: Re: Degrees of mindfulness of death and degrees of defilements (was Re: [dsg] Re: not so evil thoughts of good-hearted James. Hi James Just to quickly point out that the below is referring to me, and anyone who happens to have a lot of crude defilements. No intention of suggesting that you are in that category. We have know way of knowing the other's cittas, though there *is* evidence at times! (eg my irritated outbursts) > See, he is urging us towards much more momentary considerations. People > with cruder defilements > can benefit more from thinking of death in terms of this lifetime and what > has or has not been accomplished. > As their defilements become more subtle, and their insight more refined, > everything gradually becomes > much more focused on the moment. And that includes mindfulness of death. Metta, Phil 39002 From: Ken O Date: Sun Nov 28, 2004 4:37pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 61 - Perception/Sa~n~naa (h) Hi Larry Sanna dont hide impermanence neither does memory in concept terms. It is moha Ken O 39003 From: plnao Date: Sun Nov 28, 2004 4:46pm Subject: Heedfulness? Hello all Reading today about the five faculties, found this from SN XLVII.56: "When one quality is established in a monk, the five faculties are developed and developed well. Which one quality?" Apparently, It is not mindfulness -that is one of the faculties that this heedfulness supports. Rather, it is referring to "the case where a monk guards his mind in the midst of mental effluents and their concomitants." What is this heedfulness? Is it my friend yoniso m? What does the Pali have for this sutta? Thanks in advance! Metta, Phil 39004 From: Ken O Date: Sun Nov 28, 2004 5:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] What means 'no control' ? Hi Joop You are asking a very good question. How do we draw a line between human and animals. My opinion, animals and human are have kusala cittas that will arise, however, the difference is the intensity of the aksuala cittas and kusala cittas. In animals, the moha and lobha are very strong and hence this make the development of kusala cittas very minimal and not strong enough to develop understanding of the dhamma. The human is different, ignorance though also strong but the panna can also be strong, so there is possibility of development. That is why concentrating on walking and breathing can be a dangerous activities because animal also do them. Hence when Buddha talks about breath and walk or eat, it is always with understanding or wise attention. And the understanding is not about concepts of breath or eat or walk, when Buddha talks about breath, and walk, it is always talking in terms of paramatha dhamma, about rupas, about sense consciouness. Breath can be decipher into motion, heat, pressure and solidity. Breath can also be in terms of contact, feelings etc. My opinion the panna of animal cannot decipher them, it only knows breathing as breathing in terms of concepts. Ken O 39005 From: Date: Sun Nov 28, 2004 7:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Heedfulness? Phil: "Hello all Reading today about the five faculties, found this from SN XLVII.56: "When one quality is established in a monk, the five faculties are developed and developed well. Which one quality?" Apparently, It is not mindfulness -that is one of the faculties that this heedfulness supports. Rather, it is referring to "the case where a monk guards his mind in the midst of mental effluents and their concomitants." What is this heedfulness? Is it my friend yoniso m? What does the Pali have for this sutta?" Hi Phil, In my SN it is XLVIII,56 and B. Bodhi translates it as diligence. The Pali is appamada: appamáda: 'zeal', non-laxity, earnestness, diligence, is considered as the foundation of all progress. Just as all the footprints of living beings are surpassed by the footprint of the elephant, and the footprint of the elephant is considered as the mightiest amongst them, just so have all the meritorious qualities zeal as their foundation, and zeal is considered as the mightiest of these qualities'' (A. X, 15). Cf. the Chapter on Zeal (Appamáda Vagga) in Dhp., and the Buddha's last exhortation: "Transient are all formations. Strive zealously!" (appamádena sampádetha: D. 16) - In the commentaries, it is often explained as the presence (lit. 'non-absence') of mindfulness (satiyá avippavása). Nyanatiloka's "Buddhist Dictionary" http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/bud-dict/dic_idx.htm Larry 39006 From: Date: Sun Nov 28, 2004 7:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Heedfulness? Hi again Phil, I notice that both chanda and appamada are translated as zeal: chanda: intention, desire, will. 1. As an ethically neutral psychological term, in the sense of 'intention', it is one of those general mental factors (cetasika, q.v. Tab. II) taught in the Abhidhamma, the moral quality of which is determined by the character of the volition (cetaná, q.v.) associated therewith. The Com. explains it as 'a wish to do' (kattu-kamyatá-chanda). If intensified, it acts also as a 'predominance condition' (s. paccaya 3). 2. As an evil quality it has the meaning of 'desire', and is frequently coupled with terms for 'sensuality', 'greed', etc., for instance: káma-cchanda, 'sensuous desire', one of the 5 hindrances (s. nívarana); chanda-rága, 'lustful desire' (s. káma). It is one of the 4 wrong paths (s. agati). 3. As a good quality it is a righteous will or zeal (dhamma-chanda) and occurs, e.g. in the formula of the 4 right efforts (s. padhána): "The monk rouses his will (chandam janeti)...." If intensified, it is one of the 4 roads to power (s. iddhipáda). http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/bud-dict/dic_idx.htm Larry 39007 From: buddhatrue Date: Sun Nov 28, 2004 8:49pm Subject: [dsg] Re: not so evil thoughts of good-hearted James. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear friend James, > N: I fully agree! > Understanding has to be developed, not of the dhamma appearing yesterday, > but appearing now. It has just fallen away, agreed, but its characteristic > can be known. > Suppose you are angry, and there is wise attention to anger. The mind with > wise attention cannot arise at the same time as the angry mind, how could > they occur together. But wise attention can arise just after anger has > fallen away. > Nina. Friend Nina, Huh? Mindfulness of the present moment includes mindfulness of past moments? Then what is the whole point of the slogan "Knowing the dhammas appearing now"? (which, even though I agree with it in principal, rubs me the wrong way because of the way it is used to avoid formal practice). It seems to me that you are just talking about plain mindfulness: The Four Foundations of Mindfulness. Well, then, we don't have any disagreement…what exactly are we talking about again? LOL! I give up. I think I am going to just go sit in a corner and babble incoherently to myself… ;-)) Metta, James 39008 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Nov 28, 2004 11:21pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 62 - Perception/Sa~n~naa (i) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.3 Perception(sa~n~naa)contd] ***** Also when we do not remember something or we mistake something for something else, there is saññå which accompanies the cittas at such moments. If we have forgotten something, we did not think of the object we wanted to think of but at that moment we were thinking of another object and this was remembered and marked by saññå. For example, if we go to the market and forget to buy lettuce because we suddenly notice tomatoes and our attention turns to the tomatoes, we say that we have forgotten to buy lettuce. In reality there are moments of saññå all the time since it accompanies each citta, and saññå performs its function all the time. It depends on conditions what object is remembered at a particular moment, it does not always turn out the way ‘we’ want it. Also when we in vain try to remember a name, there is still saññå, but it remembers and ‘marks’ an object which is different from the concept we think we should remember. We may have aversion because of our forgetfulness and also then there is citta accompanied by saññå which performs its function. ***** [Ch.3 Perception(sa~n~naa)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 39009 From: jwromeijn Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 0:40am Subject: Re: What means 'no control' ? --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connieparker wrote: > > Hi Joop, Christine, All, > "[...]According to the back Index, Latent Disposition is mentioned in 'A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma' at ch. VIII 9, 14. " Thanks Connie and Nina. I have been reading it (skipped chapter VII of CMA till now) This text and what Nina have been written about it, gives me a good impression of what "latent dispositions" means. It's still strange to me that everything rises and falls away but (even the fruit of kamma disappears, as far as I understand, although it can take some lifes) but why this dispositions not fall away: not in a split second, not in some years and not in aeons? And, as explained to Nina yesterday, my main question still is: it still also the case for animals ? I think it is. That does interest me because I'm not anthropocentric. Metta Joop 39010 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 2:07am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 139) Dear Dhamma Friends, We are centering on citta as citta is the leader. There are 89 citta in total if magga cittas arise without jhana. When arise in the vicinity of jhana, there will be 121 total cittas. There have to be 121 total cittas because of different combinations of cetasikas. Citta itself is pure, luminous, and sinless as its main function is just to know the object. As this reality citta is at any given time accompanied by different combinations of cetasikas, citta has different names and in total there have to be 121 cittas. We have discussed on citta, cetasika, rupa, nibbana, pannati and we have discussed on each of 89 cittas and each of 121 cittas. After that we have discussed on each of 52 cetasikas and then followed by discussions on each of 28 rupas. These studies sound like we are studying at atomic level. Subatomic level does not recognize any element. So we have at least discussed on elementary unit of each dhamma. There is nothing more than these dhammas. Now we are discussing molecular level. 2 hydrogen atoms combine with 1 oxygen atom this cause 1 molecule of water. Like this chemistry, when 1 'citta atom' is combine with 7 cetasika atoms, they form a molecule of 'dvipancavinnana citta'. So far at molecular level, we have discussed on 40 lokuttara cittas and their accompanying cetasikas, 27 mahaggata cittas ( 15 rupavacara cittas and 12 arupavacara cittas )and their accompanying cetasikas. Among 81 loki cittas or mundane consciousness, we have discussed on 27 jhana cittas. 81 - 27 = 54 . So there left 54 kamavacara cittas. Again these 54 cittas are 24 sobhana cittas or beautiful consciousness and 30 asobhana cittas or 30 non-beautiful consciousness. Jhana cittas, magga cittas, and phala cittas are higher cittas and hard to understand if there is no Dhamma experience. But 54 kamavacara cittas are all cittas that are frequently arising at each moment and they are our daily life. 54 kamavacara cittas will be discussed in the coming posts. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39011 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 2:25am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 140 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 54 kamavacara cittas. These 54 cittas are consciousness of sensuous plane. This means that these cittas are mental states that reflect beings in sensuous planes such as human being, deva beings, hell beings, animal beings, peta beings, asura beings. Among them 24 cittas are beautiful consciousness. They are called sobhana cittas. These 24 sobhana cittas are also called kama sobhana cittas as there are sobhana cittas of other planes like rupavacara cittas, arupavacara cittas and lokuttara cittas. These 24 kama sobhana cittas can be grouped into 3 classes. These 3 classes are functionally different. They are 8 mahakusala cittas, 8 mahavipaka cittas, and 8 mahakiriya cittas. It is called 8 mahakusala cittas to differentiate these 8 cittas from other kusala cittas like rupakusala cittas which are rupa jhana and arupakusala cittas which are arupa jhana. Magga cittas are lokuttara kusala cittas. But they cannot confuse us as they are lokuttara cittas. Again 8 mahavipaka cittas have this name because there are other vipaka cittas. They are ahetuka vipaka cittas, rupavipaka cittas, and arupavipaka cittas. 4 phala cittas are called lokuttara vipaka cittas but they do not confuse us as they are lokuttara cittas. Again 8 mahakiriya cittas have the name 'maha' to differentiate them from other kiriya cittas like rupakiriya cittas, arupakiriya cittas. Ahetuka vipaka cittas do not confuse us as 2 of them are universal to all beings when beings have one of panca dvaras. Hasituppada citta is the smiling citta of arahats and this does not confuse us. So there are 8 makakusala cittas, 8 mahavipaka cittas, and 8 mahakiriya cittas and they all are collectively called 24 maka sobhana cittas. Their molecular level discussions are coming soon. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39012 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 2:40am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 141 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, Recently I repeated many cittas and many Pali words. This will help proper understanding of Dhamma. I do not think these are very heavy to carry out and work out if enough effort is produced. 1. kama 2. kamavacara 3. sobhana 4. kusala 5. vipaka 6. kiriya 7. maha 8. citta All these have been explained in earlier posts. Kama means 'sensuous things' 'sensuous matters'. What we see, hear, smell, taste, touch, and thought related to these 5 senses and their related matters are collectively called 'kama'. Kamavacara is made up of 'kama' and 'avacara'. Here kama does not mean the 'above meaning of kama'. But this 'kama' means 'kama bhumis' or sensuous planes. Avacara means 'frequently arising'. So kamavacara means 'frequently arising in kama bhumis or sensuous plane'. Sobhana means 'beautiful' 'good' 'good quality'. Kusala means 'wholesome action' 'good action' 'good-kamma producing action'. Vipaka means 'resultant'. Kiriya means 'functional' 'inoperative' 'non-kamma-producing'. Maha means 'great' and citta means 'consciousness'. Citta is the seat of mind. Citta is the focus of mind. Citta is the heart of mind. Citta is to know object. Object may be light, sound, smell, taste, touch, idea of one of 5 senses and other ideas. Citta is conscious to at a time one of these mentioned senses or ideas. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39013 From: Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 0:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: not so evil thoughts of good-hearted James. Hi, James and Nina - In a message dated 11/28/04 11:52:19 PM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > >Dear friend James, > > >N: I fully agree! > >Understanding has to be developed, not of the dhamma appearing > yesterday, > >but appearing now. It has just fallen away, agreed, but its > characteristic > >can be known. > >Suppose you are angry, and there is wise attention to anger. The > mind with > >wise attention cannot arise at the same time as the angry mind, > how could > >they occur together. But wise attention can arise just after anger > has > >fallen away. > >Nina. > > Friend Nina, > > Huh? Mindfulness of the present moment includes mindfulness of past > moments? Then what is the whole point of the slogan "Knowing the > dhammas appearing now"? (which, even though I agree with it in > principal, rubs me the wrong way because of the way it is used to > avoid formal practice). It seems to me that you are just talking > about plain mindfulness: The Four Foundations of Mindfulness. Well, > then, we don't have any disagreement…what exactly are we talking > about again? LOL! I give up. I think I am going to just go sit in > a corner and babble incoherently to myself… ;-)) > > Metta, James > =========================== I know this fine point isn't all that important, but here are my thoughts on it: First of all, I think that sati is actually the remembering to be attentive to whatever is happening, remembering to maintain clarity. I also think that when one *does* remain attentive, and a mindstate *is* clear, the content of that state is not only very clear right then and there but also "continues" as a fresh memory that too is very clear, only slightly degraded, and that sharp, fresh memory can serve as basis for wise review. This is how I think about the matter, based on my own fevered thoughts and not on Dhamma reading. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39014 From: L.A. Uberstrasse Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 6:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Contact/TG - /Suravira/ Hi, I hope you don't mind my coming in here a little bit. I have been watching this some and I am getting confused by some of the things being said below. 1. the Buddha taught that Contact works like this and one can go through this and prove it for oneself: You take one of the sense doors, say the eye. The "eye" meets color and form, and 'eye consciousness" arises; the meeting of the three is contact. This pattern run true with all of the sense doors. It is how "cognition" works. There are six separate sense doors and six sparate consciousnesses which can arise. 2. Only one phenomena can occur at a time. 3. There is no "personality" (personal aspect) taught in Buddhism but rather Anatta ( Impersonal nature of reality ). So it folloows that here is no "individuality" involved in rebirth. The only thing that goes from one life into the next in Buddhism in "kamma". this is different than individuality. 4. If the consciousness you are speaking of a mind consciousness of voidness, then the voidness is, in and of itself, an object here. there can be no consciousness arising without the formula in #1 occuring... 5. Consider the Buddhist doctrine of rebirth. According to that doctrine, continuity of consciousness occurs between the death of one body (one bag of rupa) and the conception in another body (another bag of rupa). In that no two bags of rupa can occupy the same point in space at the same point in time, then how is rebirth occuring? Could you please tell me where this doctrine appears within the suttas or the vinaya? thanks KK Suravira wrote: Dear Howard, Thank you for responding to my messages. > > Consider a continuity of individuality (bhavanga), devoid > > of an intrinsic entity (anatta) - even one that continually exists > > (annica). > > > --------------------------------------- > Howard: > Still you are talking of a consciousness that is an awareness of no > object, [Suravira] The proposition of consciousness that is without content, is not being offered in the above statement. > a consciousness without content, and that always exists, but from time > to time knows an object. [Suravira] The proposition of consciousness that always exists, is not being offered in the above statement, e.g., refer to annica. > Howard: > From my perspective that doesn't help at all. In fact the notion of an > "awareness that is non-localized in space-time" is mighty close to the > Vedantic notion of atman or brahman. [Suravira] No suggestion of a soul (a.k.a. atman, brahman) is being offered, e.g., refer to anatta. Sorry about the term awareness being of no practical use to you in this context. > Howard: > No first beginning should not imply eternalism, but it will if > consciousness is considered to be saome self-same, comtinuous entity. [Suravira] No suggestion of self-same, continuous entity, e.g., refer to anatta and annica. > ------------------------------------------ > Howard: > My point was simple: Existent consciousness without contact is > consciousness without object. That is not what was taught by the Buddha as I > understand the Dhamma. Nor has it ever been my experience. > ------------------------------------------- > [Suravira] Let me first address your last statement ('Nor has it ever been my experience'). A citta without a contact object is, by definition, not able to be perceived, therefore it is by its nature unconscious. As such none of us are able to state that we have had an unconscious experience. So your assertion is 100% correct. Right on the money! Now for your statement 'Existent consciousness without contact is consciousness without object.' In responce to a sensed object a citta arises, then passes away. The 'contact' event arises and passes away. By the time one (as may be conceived of rightly in accordance with anatta and annica) is conscious of the contact event, that sensed object event is non-existent within the present moment. (So one can readily argue that at any point in time when an object is not being sensed that moment is prior to contact - pick any moment as any moment subsequent to a contact event will be entirely suitable). Between the moment of sense impression and the moment of being conscious of the sensed object (which is to say in the state of being conscious), nama dhamma uncoupled to sense impressions or to concepts (thoughts, memories, etc.) i.e., pannattis dhamma, arise, persist for an instant and cease. These citta devoid of pannattis dhamma and uncoupled to sense impressions are called bhavanga-citta. Citta which we are conscious of ALWAYS have an object- representation, i.e., a concept, thought, memory, etc.). But there are also bhavanga-citta, that is citta without an object- representation, and which we are NEVER conscious of. In short there is an important distinction to be made between being conscious of some thing (which is a state of consciousness) and the nature of consciousness. Consider the Buddhist doctrine of rebirth. According to that doctrine, continuity of consciousness occurs between the death of one body (one bag of rupa) and the conception in another body (another bag of rupa). In that no two bags of rupa can occupy the same point in space at the same point in time, then how is rebirth occuring? Before you explain this, it must be pointed out that at some moment in this transition nama-vinnana must leave one bag of rupa and then arise within another distinctly different bag of rupa - all the while maintaining continuity of individuality. During that transition moment, how can contact occur (in the absense of a bag of rupa, i.e., without 5 physical sense organs)? Furthermore, given that nama has a nature absent of physical properties and therefore absent of any spatial extention, how can nama-vinnana actually occupy a point in space let alone move from that point in space to another point in space? These are not easy questions to grapple with. If the nature of consciousness is such that is always requires contact/concept, then the Buddhist doctrine of rebirth is indefensible (even when taking recourse to arguing from the absolute prespective of truth). Or can the doctrine of rebirth understood by appreciating another aspect of nama-vinnana - i.e., given no spatial extension therefore there is no boundary in which content can be extant. With metta, Suravira 39015 From: Ken O Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 8:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Contact/TG - /Suravira/ Hi KK Rebirth relinking is not about rupa, is about kamma. Kamma links both the dying citta and the rebirth citta. During the rebirth citta, kamma is the one that produces the rupa for that life and it also kamma that determines the dying citta of that previous life. How does kamma does it in such short space and time, only Buddha knows the true working of kamma and this knowledge was not share by his great disciples. I have not come across him explain how does kamma function, how one can be dead in this plane in a split second and then rebirth again in another plane in the next split second. Just like some human become devas immediately after their death as seen in the suttas. Ken O 39016 From: connieparker Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 9:02am Subject: Re: 6 poems (really 9) Hi, Christine, [...] The Lady now wears the gold robes of a fully ordained Theravada Bhikkhuni [...] But IS she one? I'd sure like to believe it, but as many times as I've gone around and around with it, I just don't. I thought a lot recently about chucking my job and this cushy little life I've got to head off to a wat across the country, telling myself I'd only ordain as a mae chi, but who am I kidding? I'm all to willing to be convinced the Lady IS what her robes suggest. I'm sure I could justify going against my understanding of the tradition to feel more a part of it? I'm really good at twisting things around to my liking: Oh, but I was invited. Why, that's almost a "come, bhikkhu". Conditions brought it my way. "Conditions"?!?!? Stories and my own super monkey glue, more like. And, oh, it's not really breaking the tradition, it's just another little compromise, like the monks buying their own food and such. Flip, flop, wiggle, struggle, squirm... all my thoughts are little herrings and my fishy thinking stinks. Even my sitting here all smug, thinking I might compromise the 10th precept because I've got a job, but all I do is sign the paycheck over to my mom. I don't actually spend the stuff. I don't do this, I don't do that. LOL - I don't even have hair... because I don't like to mess with it. And who's to stop me from wearing anything I might like as long as I have any kind of idea that the clothes make the person? And do I really want to be pressured to sit and 'practice' for someone else's understanding of what I'm supposed to get out of it? I wrote a friend who helped me remember a few things that in my little 'laundry meditation hut' there is also a method and the conventional results are there for anyone to see... also all the paramattha dhammas no matter where and what I'm doing. Actual holy life must be where it is understood, in the actual cittas, with no choice in 'how to live'... not in my stories about it. I told my boss I wouldn't be quitting after all. Anyway, that's my update on the job and I do still care what you, bunches of black and white marks on a screen and my thoughts about them though you may be, might think of me. Was also happy to read I wasn't the only one who felt stupid trying to read between the lines of CMA ch. 8... thank you. Hope Rusty's doing well. Jozai falls down sometimes when he does that dog shake thing and still wobbles more than he used to. I guess one of these days, he'll stay paralyzed. Meanwhile, he's not too interested in my ideas of how he should take it easy. peace, connie 39017 From: Hugo Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 9:42am Subject: Bhikkhu Khantipalo: Practical advice for Meditators (or newcomers to Buddhism) Hello everybody, There have been a few threads from people asking for advice in starting the Path. I found this document from Bhikkhu Khantipalo which is very interesting. Here is one excerpt that stresses the need for a balanced practice (approach of which I am a big fan of): Quote: By way of warning it may be mentioned here that in the Buddhist world can be found a number of "methods" which seem to promise the riches of Dhamma all in no time. One hears such remarks as, "What's the use of books and study?" Or even, "The development of calm is a waste of time! One should only develop insight." Such lop-sided approaches do not reflect the wisdom of Lord Buddha, who taught time and again the necessity of a balanced development of mind. Books and their study are useful to some people who wish to gain a good background of what Lord Buddha really said, before taking up more intensive practice. As for the other assertion, no real insight (only delusive ideas) will arise to the person whose mind has no experience of calm. Such views as these, which are usually based on some peculiar experience of those "teachers" who originate them, are apt to mislead many, since the craving for quick results coupled with the dislike of the necessary hard work, are easily stirred up. There must be patience to accept that the conditions required for success of meditation (as outlined here) have to be fulfilled, and the only result if failing to do so, is straying off the Way. The meditator applies himself steadily to whatever task he has in hand and, coming to the end of it, does not feel tired at all but straightaway takes up a new objective. Greetings, -- Hugo 39018 From: Hugo Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 9:43am Subject: Re: Bhikkhu Khantipalo: Practical advice for Meditators (or newcomers to Buddhism) Now, if I add the link, I think it would be more useful for people. :-) http://www.cambodianbuddhist.org/english/website/lib/bps/wheels/wheel116.html -- Hugo 39019 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 10:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] bhavanga disturbed Hi Larry, op 29-11-2004 00:55 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > Vism.XIV,115 Note 46. "...How does there come to be disturbance of the > life- continuum that has a different support?... > > L: "I assume "different support" means different sense-base. > This suggests 2 rupas to me, internal and external, and explains a > little how defective organs impinge on consciousness with erroneous > data. How do you see it? N: I found another longer text in T.A. (Co. to the Abhidhammmattha Sangaha, p. 126) and I think this clarifies the matter. The support of bhavangacitta is the rupa which is heartbase. I thought so but was not sure. Here is also the simile of the running man, Htoo gave. Text of the Co. to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha (T.A. p. 126): <...For when there is impact with the object by virtue of its being positioned in a place that is suitable for the five sense organs, the sequence of existence-continuum gets interrupted by the experience of that impact on the sense organs [though] it is not interrupted suddenly. As when a man who is running fast wants to stop, stops only after he has taken one or two further steps, so it is interrupted only after it has occurred twice...But surely, when visible forms, etc., make impact with the sense organs it is only vibration of what is supported by those [sense organs] that makes sense, so how is there vibrating of the exitence-continuum which is supported by the heart-base? Because of [their]being bound together as a continuity. For when a fly has alighted on a grain of sugar on one surface of a drum, and the other surface is struck with a stick or whatever, the sugar is made to vibrate by the vibration in turn of the drum¹s skin and cords, etc., and the fly flies off and goes. Similarly when visible form, etc., makes impact with the sense organs, the essential elements, which are their supports, are vibrated, and as a result of the successive vibrating of the other material elements that are bound up with them the heartbase is vibrated, and the vibrating of the existence-continuum that is supported by that causes activity to occur. It is said: One should illustrate by the simile of the grain of sugar how, when one base is struck, there is disturbance of what is supported by some other [base] by reason of their being bound together.> L: The two rupas are the rupa that impinges on the sensitive material of > the sense base and the rupa that interrupts bhavanga and is the object > of consciousness. N: It is the same rupa, say, visible object. This lasts seventeen moments of citta. That is why it can be experienced by cittas in a sense-door process. Also the rupa which is sense organ lasts seventeen moments of citta. L:We could probably say this second rupa is an extension > of the sensitive matter that stretches from the sense base to the mind > base. N: See above. L:In any case this commentary seems to clearly recognize that the > external rupa that impinges on the sensitive matter is not the rupa that > is the object of consciousness. N: Not the object of bhavanga-citta, but it will be the object of the cittas arising in that sense-door process. Nina. 39020 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 10:59am Subject: Visuddhimagga XIV, 117 and Tiika, 118. . Visuddhimagga XIV, 117 and Tiika. Vis. XIV, 117. (d)-(h) Next to adverting,[47] taking the eye door first, 'eye-consciousness' (d) arises accomplishing the function of 'seeing' in the eye door and having the eye-sensitivity as its physical basis. And [likewise] (e) 'ear-', (f) 'nose-', (g) 'tongue-', and (h) 'body-consciousness' arise, accomplishing respectively the functions of 'hearing', etc., in the ear door and so on. N: The visible object that impinges on the eyesense is a condition for seeing. This reminds us that seeing is not self, it can only arise when there are the appropriate conditions. When seeing arises the ruupas which are eyesense and visible object have not fallen away yet. Ruupa lasts as long as seventeen moments of citta and thus visible object can be experienced by several moments of cittas arising in a process. The same is true for the other sense-cognitions. Vis. text: These comprise the profitable resultant [consciousnesses] (34)-(38) with respect to desirable and desirable-neutral objective fields, and the unprofitable resultant (50)-(54) with respect to undesirable and undesirable-neutral objective fields. N: Seeing and the other sense-cognitions are kusala vipaakacittas or akusala vipaakacittas. Kusala vipaakacitta experiences a desirable object or a moderately desirable object, and akusala vipaakacitta experiences an undesirable object or a moderately undesirable object. Text Vis. :This is how the occurrence of ten kinds of resultant consciousness should be understood as seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, and touching. --------------------- Note 47, taken from the Tiika: ' "Next to adverting" means next to five-door adverting. For those who do not admit the cognitive series beginning with receiving, just as they do not admit the heart basis, the Pali has been handed down in various places in the way beginning "For the eye-consciousness element as receiving (sampa.ticchanaaya cakkhuvi~n~naa.nadhaatuyaa)" (see Ch. IV, n.13); for the Pali cannot be contradicted' (Pm.479). The quotation as it stands is not traced to the Pi.takas. ---------------------- N: The cittas of the eye-door process such as receiving-consciousness, etc. are not expressively mentioned in the suttas. We read in the suttas about seeing etc. which is followed by defilements or by right understanding. The details of the process, the cittas arising in between seeing etc. and the akusala cittas or kusala cittas, are not expounded in the suttas, nor is the heart-base expressively mentioned. That is why some people will not admit what is explained in the Abhidhamma and Commentaries. The Middle Length Sayings, III, no 115, mentions mind element, mano-dhaatu, and mind-consciousness element, mano-viññaa.na-dhaatu, but the details have not been explained. **** Vis. XIV, 118. (i) Because of the words 'Eye-consciousness having arisen and ceased, next to that there arises consciousness, mind, mentation ... which is appropriate mind-element' (Vbh.88), etc., next to eye-consciousness, etc., and 'receiving' the same objective fields as they [deal with], mind-element arises as (39) profitable resultant next to profitable resultant [eye-consciousness, etc.,] and as (55) unprofitable resultant next to [459] unprofitable resultant [eye-consciousness, and so on]. This is how the occurrence of two kinds of resultant consciousness should be understood as receiving. N: Mind-element, mano-dhaatu, referred to in this para is the receiving-consciousness, which is either akusala vipaakacitta, or kusala vipaakacitta. When the preceding sense-cognition is akusala vipaakacitta, the receiving-consciousness is also akusala vipaakacitta, and when the preceding sense-cognition is kusala vipaakacitta, the receiving-consciousness is also kusala vipaakacitta. As to the words, consciousness (citta.m), mind (mano), mentation (maanasa.m) which is appropriate mind-element' (Vbh.88), this is taken from the Book of Analysis, p. 114, which gives several synonyms of citta. ****** Nina. 39021 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 10:59am Subject: Re: [dsg]bhavanga, Howard to Suravira. Hi Howard, op 28-11-2004 23:33 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > As I understand it, a bhavanga citta is supposed to have the same > object ads the prior rebirth citta. That is not explained as being without > object > so far as I know. But I am rather ignorant of Abhidhamma and Abhidhammic > commentaries. I would hpoe that some others here more knowledgeable than I > would > weigh in on this topic. (Hint, hint!) N: You explained it well. See recent Vis texts and correspondence with Larry. It is all about bhavanga. Nina. 39022 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 11:08am Subject: Re: Bhikkhu Khantipalo: Practical advice for Meditators (or newcomers to Buddhism) Hello Hugo, all, You may be interested in a little more about the former Khantipalo Bhikkhu - now Mr. Lawrence Mills - and an update on what he is doing nowadays. He was born in Britain in 1932, was a Buddhist Theravada monk from 1959-1991. During the period between 1961-1972 Lawrence was resident in Thailand receiving teachings from many forest meditation teachers. In 1973 he traveled to Australia and helped found the first Buddhist temple in Sydney as well as Wat Buddha Dhamma Forest Meditation Centre. In 1991 Lawrence decided to give back his monastic robes and as a student of Chogyal Namkai Norbu he has continued to actively teach Buddhism. As Lawrence Mills he married and continued in the lay life as the guiding teacher at the all traditions Bodhi Citta Buddhist Centre, Cairns, Queensland, Australia. You can read about this centre at: www.bodhicitta.org.au (I think Azita from dsg has attended that centre on a few occasions). metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Hugo wrote: > Now, if I add the link, I think it would be more useful for people. :-) > > http://www.cambodianbuddhist.org/english/website/lib/bps/wheels/wheel 116.html > > -- > Hugo 39023 From: "christine_forsyth" Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 12:26 pm Subject: Re: 6 poems (really 9) Hello Connie, Nice to read you here. Is the Lady (and the, now, scores like her) fully ordained? Yes, I believe so, Connie. But it is not a matter for debate - most debate starts with defending a fixed point of view and often only encourages closed minds. It is best to search for information, weigh the opinions of those you respect, decide what you think is correct and act on it, if you wish. What matters is that Buddhism ought to offer women similar possibilities to live the reclusive life with safety and support (accommodation, clothing, food, medical care and learning) that it offers to men. An interesting Sri Lankan newpaper article: http://www.buddhanet.net/nunorder.htm Jozai clearly has a mind of his own! Rusty is doing well - after two months of not barking after his seizures, he has started growling and barking again as a form of communication. (I had been pestering the Medical consultants at the hospital about what they knew about dogs and aphasia. As it turns out, they now know a lot more now than they did before Rusty's illness:-)) He is also starting to do his joyful dance when I arrive home from work or offer him his evening meal - for eight weeks he had only exhibited a dull stare. I know it is drawing near to the 'end of days' for him, but so it is for all of us. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connieparker wrote: > Hi, Christine, > > [...] The Lady now wears the gold robes of a fully ordained Theravada > Bhikkhuni [...] > > But IS she one? I'd sure like to believe it, but as many times as I've > gone around and around with it, I just don't. I thought a lot recently > about chucking my job and this cushy little life I've got to head off to a > wat across the country, telling myself I'd only ordain as a mae chi, but > who am I kidding? I'm all to willing to be convinced the Lady IS what her > robes suggest. I'm sure I could justify going against my understanding of > the tradition to feel more a part of it? I'm really good at twisting > things around to my liking: Oh, but I was invited. Why, that's almost a > "come, bhikkhu". Conditions brought it my way. "Conditions"?!?!? > Stories and my own super monkey glue, more like. And, oh, it's not really > breaking the tradition, it's just another little compromise, like the > monks buying their own food and such. Flip, flop, wiggle, struggle, > squirm... all my thoughts are little herrings and my fishy thinking > stinks. Even my sitting here all smug, thinking I might compromise the > 10th precept because I've got a job, but all I do is sign the paycheck > over to my mom. I don't actually spend the stuff. I don't do this, I > don't do that. LOL - I don't even have hair... because I don't like to > mess with it. And who's to stop me from wearing anything I might like as > long as I have any kind of idea that the clothes make the person? And do > I really want to be pressured to sit and 'practice' for someone else's > understanding of what I'm supposed to get out of it? I wrote a friend who > helped me remember a few things that in my little 'laundry meditation hut' > there is also a method and the conventional results are there for anyone > to see... also all the paramattha dhammas no matter where and what I'm > doing. Actual holy life must be where it is understood, in the actual > cittas, with no choice in 'how to live'... not in my stories about it. I > told my boss I wouldn't be quitting after all. > > Anyway, that's my update on the job and I do still care what you, bunches > of black and white marks on a screen and my thoughts about them though you > may be, might think of me. Was also happy to read I wasn't the only one > who felt stupid trying to read between the lines of CMA ch. 8... thank you. > > Hope Rusty's doing well. Jozai falls down sometimes when he does that dog > shake thing and still wobbles more than he used to. I guess one of these > days, he'll stay paralyzed. Meanwhile, he's not too interested in my > ideas of how he should take it easy. > > peace, > connie 39024 From: Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 8:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Contact/TG - /Suravira/ Hi KK I would just add to what Ken O said -- As for rebirth consciousness from one birth to another, the Buddha compared it to fire being flung by wind and that the wind, at that moment, was the support of fire. TG 39025 From: robmoult Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 1:29pm Subject: Re: 6 poems (really 9) Hi Connie / Christine, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connieparker wrote: > Hi, Christine, > > [...] The Lady now wears the gold robes of a fully ordained Theravada > Bhikkhuni [...] > > But IS she one? I'd sure like to believe it, but as many times as I've > gone around and around with it, I just don't. I am going to butt in here with my two cents worth. It seems to me that if this person had been a man, there would have been no question as to the legitimacy of his claim of being a full fledged monk. I suspect that there are many monks, particularly in Asian countries where Buddhism is the state religion, who may be less deserving to wear the robes than this woman. Are we judging this person solely based on her gender? Are men any less susceptible to the psychological rationalizing that Connie has described? Metta, Rob M :-) 39026 From: naresh gurwani Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 9:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: to Naresh, suttas Dear Nina I was reading the e-book provided on Dhamma about cita's & citasikas. All the experience is with citta , the good deed, bad deed and also the result of it. So we need to understand when the citta arises & falls away. And just observe, we cant do anything about it ? is it so ? And resultant cita are according to kamma which we have to undergo whether pleasnat & unpleasant. If unpleasant what we can do about it, there is no elimination possible ? Again coming to wordly matters, if we have a desire isit good or bad , as desires cant be destoyed , everybody has desires.Some have desires for Money, business, job, love etc. And as per my knowledge till date desires helps to move a person ahead or a motto in life which is i think very important, this desire also involves helping others. Pls quote on it. Naresh Gurwani --- nina van gorkom wrote: > > Dear Naresh, > op 27-11-2004 19:06 schreef naresh gurwani op > nar_gurwani@y...: > > > If all things were going without our awarness then > how > > are those people who are extremely sucessful in > their > > work & respective proffesional and they can really > > concentrate & achive things which are impossible > for > > any common person.And this also includes super > > spiritual power. > Nina: Successful in work, yes. Successful in worldly > matters. This does not > mean success in morality, in wisdom. The Buddha > taught another kind of > awareness and understanding that goes much deeper > and that can lead to less > vices and eventually to the eradication of all > defilements. 39027 From: plnao Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 3:03pm Subject: Heedfulness/appeal of suttas Hi Larry, Mike and all Larry :In my SN it is XLVIII,56 and B. Bodhi translates it as diligence. The Pali is appamada: appamáda: 'zeal', non-laxity, earnestness, diligence, is considered as the foundation of all progress. Just as all the footprints of living beings are surpassed by the footprint of the elephant, and the footprint of the elephant is considered as the mightiest amongst them, just so have all the meritorious qualities zeal as their foundation, and zeal is considered as the mightiest of these qualities'' (A. X, 15). Cf. the Chapter on Zeal (Appamáda Vagga) in Dhp., and the Buddha's last exhortation: "Transient are all formations. Strive zealously!" (appamádena sampádetha: D. 16) - In the commentaries, it is often explained as the presence (lit. 'non-absence') of mindfulness (satiyá avippavása). Phil: Thanks for the information, Larry and Mike. This appamada seems so similar to the virya (energy/persistence) that is one of the faculties that I would wonder why it isn't included in the same faculty. Or is there a difference between appamada and virya that is important enough for me to know about? This might be one of those questions to which Nina would wisely answer "does it matter to us?" - or then again it might not be! Something occured to me about the way the five faculties are presented in the Suttanta, at least in the collection of sutta passages (Wings to Freedom) through which I was reading about them. In some suttas, wisdom leads the others, in one sutta, concentration must arise before wisdom can arise, and in several others it is this appamada, which is not a faculty, that is chief to the five faculties. And of course, unless one has studied the suttas very thoroughly, in Pali, one's understanding of categories such as the five factors depends on translations and the selection of suttas by editors such as Thanissaro Bhikkhu. This reminded me of both the benefit and the danger of suttas. We are reminded of their great wealth, of the way the Buddha teaches to different people according to their accumulations. On the other hand, we can see why this great wealth can lead to factionalism and proliferation of views, because proponents of different ways of practice can find support for their views with a lot of unresolvable squabbling resulting. This might be the risk in relying exclusively on conventional language to develop one's understanding. Thus the appeal of Abhidhamma, for those who appreciate it. Consideration of paramattha dhammas always bring us back to the moment, back to deep Dhamma. I'm going to be receiving my copy of MN (Bhikkhu Bodhi) any day now. I have long awaited a chance to read this book, and I can predict that I am going to become absolutely enthralled by it, and not only by the deep Dhamma in it, but also by the language of the similes, of the descriptions of the characters, by the poetry. Thankfully, Bhikkhu Bodhi is keen on Abhidhamma, so I will not wander off the path too often. Metta, Phil 39028 From: Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 4:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bhavanga disturbed Hi Nina, Light is not a direct object of consciousness. If it were there would be no need for eye sensitive matter. It is eye sensitive matter which stretches from the eye to the heart base and manifests as a vibration that is the object of eye consciousness and eye door process. Larry 39029 From: kenhowardau Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 4:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Contact/TG - /Suravira/ Dear KK, You wrote: ---------------- > I hope you don't mind my coming in here a little bit. I have been watching this some and I am getting confused by some of the things being said below. 1. the Buddha taught that Contact works like this and one can go through this and prove it for oneself: > ----------------- I vaguely remember where that was said, but I don't remember the context. Before we can prove any part of the Dhamma for ourselves, we have to arrive at the correct intellectual understanding (of what we are going to prove). Judging from the variety of contradictory interpretations (of phassa, e.g.), I'd say most of us at DSG are a long way from stage one. :-) -------------------------- KK: > You take one of the sense doors, say the eye. The "eye" meets color and form, and 'eye consciousness" arises; the meeting of the three is contact. This pattern run true with all of the sense doors. It is how "cognition" works. There are six separate sense doors and six sparate consciousnesses which can arise. > --------------------------- Although your description of the namas and rupas arising at the eye- door could be improved upon, I think it is generally correct. At any given moment, the world exists as a number of namas and rupas arising at one of the six doors. (The nama, phassa, is always among them.) ------------ KK: > 2. Only one phenomena can occur at a time. > ------------- Several phenomena occur at a time. I think you mean to say that only one can be *observed* at a time. That is true: each consciousness (citta) can only have one object (arammana). ----------------------------- KK: > 3. There is no "personality" (personal aspect) taught in Buddhism but rather Anatta ( Impersonal nature of reality ). So it folloows that here is no "individuality" involved in rebirth. The only thing that goes from one life into the next in Buddhism in "kamma". this is different than individuality. > ----------------------------- Hmmm! Always remember that nothing carries over from one lifetime to another (not even from one citta to another). All the namas and rupas that exist in one moment of consciousness (kamma is just one of them), condition the namas and rupas that arise in the next moment of consciousness. The one minor exception is the [sense object] rupa that is taken as the object of a process of cittas. It can last as long as seventeen cittas. ------------------- KK: > 4. If the consciousness you are speaking of a mind consciousness of voidness, then the voidness is, in and of itself, an object here. > -------------------- Yes, any characteristic (in this case anatta (voidness)) of an object nama or rupa can be directly observed by citta. The anatta characteristic only becomes apparent if the nama called panna (right understanding) is present at that moment. -------- KK: > there can be no consciousness arising without the formula in #1 occuring... > -------- Agreed. ----------- KK: > 5. Consider the Buddhist doctrine of rebirth. According to that doctrine, continuity of consciousness occurs between the death of one body (one bag of rupa) and the conception in another body (another bag of rupa). In that no two bags of rupa can occupy the same point in space at the same point in time, then how is rebirth occuring? ---------- A bag of rupa (in other words, a human body) is a concept. A concept has no ultimate existence - it is a mere idea. The human body is an idea of how certain rupas (rupa-kaya?) might appear in our conceptual world. The Buddhist doctrine of rebirth is all about the formula in #1. The cuti-citta is that formula at the moment we call death. The patisandhi-citta is that formula at the moment we call rebirth. When we express the Buddhist doctrine in conceptual forms, we talk about a human body-and-mind dying and another human body-and-mind being reborn. Because there is no sense consciousness intervening between cuti-citta and pataiandhi-citta, we Buddhists have no concept of a temporary life (in a badro-world) in between conceptual death and rebirth. (I hope that helps and I haven't totally missed the point of your question.) ----------- KK: > Could you please tell me where this doctrine appears within the suttas or the vinaya? ----------- Where doesn't it occur? Quite seriously, can you point to one teaching in the suttas or in the vinaya (or the in abhidhamma or the in commentaries) that does not describe a moment of consciousness (formula #1)? Ken H 39030 From: connieparker Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 4:50pm Subject: Re: 6 poems (really 9) Hi, RobM :) / Christine Smiling Rob: It seems to me that if this person had been a man, there would have been no question as to the legitimacy of his claim of being a full fledged monk. No great respecter of her own opinions and who knows how blind to how narrow and twisted her thoughts are Connie: Uh, it depends, among other things, on whether Mahayana monks made up part of his quorum and he wanted to call himself a Theravadan monk, but I don't want to debate the issues, either. I didn't bring it up to judge the nuns or point at anything other than my own self/thinking. Sorry if I sound argumentative. Me, myself and I and our twins have been lately, this being a favorite topic of ours, and only one of us has a sense of humour. I doubt any of us has much equanimity. I just tell myself they're New Tradition nuns and don't care that it's oxymoronic. Actually, I only use the feminine forms of the word to be social... in my head, there are only genderless monks. No denying I live in my own little worlds, mostly thought. No denying that I don't keep even 5 precepts perfectly. I laugh at myself because this house has a Murphy bed, something else I thought I always wanted, and only company ever sleeps in it because I like the floor... that's not keeping a precept or understanding anything, just preference. I might've learned to wear make-up if I hadn't gotten eyelash streaks on my glasses the first time I tried it. Lately, it's just a reminder of a certain kind of foulness when I'm trying to get it out of the motel's towels before I throw them in the machines. Some of the stuff on the sheets and how they smell are good for other reminders. My mind should be pretty clean from all the bleach and the cleaners with "do not breathe fumes" warnings on their labels. I couldn't help noticing that that revival article [http://www.buddhanet.net/nunorder.htm] used some pretty colorful words in talking about progressive democratic thinking (wherein the half-loaf half-way house dasa silas don't seem to count for much) -vs- reactionary, conservative, obscurantist, dogmatic, casteist and anti feminist priestcraft ideas from poor and backward cultures keeping the ignorant, illiterate and females from their human rights. Human rights being what when I say the only real rights are the 8 of the Path? And why, continuing to digress, separate the other kind into human and women's, I ask myself. Which half of the loaf do I get? I like the ends more than the middle, and my toast burnt in the land of the free and home of the brave where wealth isn't measured in morality and education isn't for understanding. I'm not sure Buddha was altogether egalitarian, whatever that means, either... is the article's 'samanatmata' a typo? The early nuns couldn't practice all the dhutangas (something else that's always been part of my great 'I wanna be a monk when I grow up' solitude fantasy)... not to mention (whatever that phrase means!) the 8 special, heavy rules the New Order (better? O, not if I abbreviate) nuns were advised not to speak out against too openly for awhile. I guess my point to myself is that if and when I ever am a 'holy one', I'll be the first to know it and it won't matter whether I'm ordained or not... there are enough quotes a person could pick out of the suttas to say ordination's not an issue... certainly not a matter of life and death unless one happens to be an arhat. And don't think this is my last word to myself on the subject. Much more fun, I guess, chasing words around my head than paying attention to what's really going on in my life. peace, connie 39031 From: Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 0:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Contact/TG - /Suravira/ Hi, Ken (and KK) - I'm just picking up on one line of your post, Ken, that caught my attention. In a message dated 11/29/04 7:47:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@y... writes: > At any > given moment, the world exists as a number of namas and rupas > arising at one of the six doors. ========================= What a mind-picture this creates for me: A large sphere with a tiny aperture labelled "object" at one point on the surface. Within, wildly churning, tumbling, and careening off the interior sphere surface are trillions of very small blue pellets and red pellets (like the blue and red states in the recent U.S. election ;-), the red pellets being namas and the blue pellets being rupas, and, from time to time, a pellet pops out of the object aperture! The aperture lights up brightly each time a pellet pops out with one of six alternative colors: blue and five different shades of red, the color depending on the type of pellet. ;-)) Next time someone asks me what "life is all about", I shall tell him "It is a huge pellet-sphere, my friend, a huge pellet-sphere!" :-) With discrete but multitudinous metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39032 From: Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 0:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Contact/TG - /Suravira/ Hi again, Ken (and KK) - In a message dated 11/29/04 8:40:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: > The > aperture lights up brightly each time a pellet pops out with one of six > alternative colors: blue and five different shades of red, the color > depending on the > type of pellet. ;-)) > ========================== I was off with my numbers! This should read as follows: _____________________ The aperture lights up brightly each time a pellet pops out with one of five alternative colors: blue and four different shades of red, the color depending on the type of pellet. ;-)) ------------------------------------- With colorful metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39033 From: agriosinski Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 8:00pm Subject: Please help me to find sutta with: "Yaya ca bhikkhave, avijjaya nivutassa balassa Yaya ca tanhaya samyuttassa ayam kayo samudagato" Bhikkhus, this body of the fool comes into existence being obstructed by ignorance, and being associated with craving. "Avijjupaladdhiya khandhe upalabbhati." If the ignorance is obtained, then the body is obtained. Could someone help me to find this suta please? metta, Agrios 39034 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 8:36pm Subject: [dsg] Re: not so evil thoughts of good-hearted James. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, James and Nina - =========================== > I know this fine point isn't all that important, but here are my > thoughts on it: First of all, I think that sati is actually the remembering to be > attentive to whatever is happening, remembering to maintain clarity. I also > think that when one *does* remain attentive, and a mindstate *is* clear, the > content of that state is not only very clear right then and there but also > "continues" as a fresh memory that too is very clear, only slightly degraded, and > that sharp, fresh memory can serve as basis for wise review. This is how I think > about the matter, based on my own fevered thoughts and not on Dhamma reading. > > With metta, > Howard Hi Howard, Yes, I agree. I believe that you are speaking of sensory memory which is of an extremely short duration: "The sensory information store has unlimited capacity, and reacts to both visual and auditory information. However, the duration of information in sensory memory is extremely brief, perhaps only 300 miliseconds, and is subject to rapid decay." http://coe.sdsu.edu/eet/Articles/stmemory/start.htm To what capacity sensory memory, short term memory, and long term memory serve in the practice of mindfulness I am not sure. Perhaps it is a subject worthy of more study? Metta, James 39035 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 8:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Contact/TG - /Suravira/ --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi again, Ken (and KK) - > > In a message dated 11/29/04 8:40:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@a... > writes: > > > The > > aperture lights up brightly each time a pellet pops out with one of six > > alternative colors: blue and five different shades of red, the color > > depending on the > > type of pellet. ;-)) > > > ========================== > I was off with my numbers! This should read as follows: > _____________________ > The aperture lights up brightly each time a pellet pops out with one > of five > alternative colors: blue and four different shades of red, the color > depending on the > type of pellet. ;-)) > ------------------------------------- > > With colorful metta, > Howard Friend Howard, Gosh, it looks like my gumball analogy has gotten out of control! ;- )) Metta, James 39036 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 9:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 6 poems (really 9) Dear Connie and Christine, Connie, I liked all of your mail, well said. I just took off this line, because I thought of Rusty but I was afraid to ask Christine. I missed some mails since I was away longer. Christine, how was Rusty when you returned? Nina. op 29-11-2004 18:02 schreef connieparker op connieparker@i...: > Hope Rusty's doing well. 39037 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 9:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What means 'no control' ? Dear Joop, op 29-11-2004 09:40 schreef jwromeijn op jwromeijn@y...: > but why this dispositions not fall away: not in a split > second, not in some years and not in aeons? N: This is frightening, isn't it? They are dormant in each citta, they do not arise with the akusala citta, and thus we cannot say they fall away. They condition the arising of akusala citta. Only lokuttara magga-citta eradicates them, stage by stage. But, also before magga-citta, by developing understanding of the eightfold Path, these latent tendencies wear away. J: And, as explained to Nina yesterday, my main question still is: it > still also the case for animals ? N: Sure, they also condition akusala citta for animals. As Ken O explained, animals do not have the capacity to develop understanding. Take the Bodhisatta's horse Kanthaka who was so sad to have to return to the palace. But he was reborn a deva, and he could then listen to the Dhamma. J: I think it is. That does interest me because I'm not anthropocentric. N: I also feel a lot for animals. Nina. 39038 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 9:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] dying-consciousness. Dear Ken O, I like all your mails. I just have one remark: kamma that produced our rebirth-consciousness in this life also conditioned the last javana cittas before the dying-consciousness of our previous life. The dying-consciousness of that previous life 9the last moment) was conditioned by the same kamma that produced the rebirth-consciousness of that previous life. Nina. op 29-11-2004 17:56 schreef Ken O op ashkenn2k@y...: > During the rebirth > citta, kamma is the one that produces the rupa for that life and it > also kamma that determines the dying citta of that previous life. 39039 From: Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 9:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Please help me to find sutta with: Hi Agrios, It might be this one. The translation is a little different and in a note to the first quote B. Bodhi gives some Pali that is slightly different: evam aya.m kaayo samudaagato (this body has thereby originted). http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn12-019.html Larry ------------------------- "Yaya ca bhikkhave, avijjaya nivutassa balassa Yaya ca tanhaya samyuttassa ayam kayo samudagato" Bhikkhus, this body of the fool comes into existence being obstructed by ignorance, and being associated with craving. "Avijjupaladdhiya khandhe upalabbhati." If the ignorance is obtained, then the body is obtained. Could someone help me to find this suta please? metta, Agrios 39040 From: Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 4:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Contact/TG - /Suravira/ Hi, James - In a message dated 11/29/04 11:49:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > Friend Howard, > > Gosh, it looks like my gumball analogy has gotten out of control! ;-)) > > Metta, James > ======================= Hey, you're right! I didn't even think of that! ;-) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39041 From: kenhowardau Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 9:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Contact/TG - /Suravira/ Hi Howard, This pellet sphere is an interesting project, but it needs a lot of work. I don't know about 'one blue and four shades of red.' Your original idea of one blue and five (one for each sense door) reds was better, I think. But then you have to remember that there are three rupas that are capable of arising at the body-door, so that makes seven reds by my reckoning. And then there are fifty-four namas that can arise at the mind door. And there are the doors themselves and other namas and rupas that only arise at the mind door. And what about concepts? I would make them black, and you would make them the fifty-fifth shade of red, I think. (We are never going to agree on that one.) Perhaps I'm taking it all too seriously, but there are problems everywhere I look. The whole project should be scrapped before it gets out of hand! :-) Ken H 39042 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 10:46pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 63 - Perception/Sa~n~naa (j) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.3 Perception(sa~n~naa)contd] ***** Saññå accompanies cittas which arise in a process and it also accompanies cittas which do not arise in a process, namely the paìisandhi-citta (rebirth-consciousness), the bhavanga-citta (lifecontinuum) and the cuti-citta (dying-consciousness). When we are sound asleep and not dreaming there are bhavanga-cittas and also in between the different processes of cittas there are bhavangacittas. The object of the paìisandhi-citta, the bhavanga-citta and the cuti-citta is the same as the object experienced by the javanacittas which arose shortly before the cuti-citta of the previous life1. ‘We’, or rather the cittas which are thinking at this moment, do not know what that object is. However every time the bhavangacitta arises in between the processes of cittas it experiences that object and the saññå which accompanies the bhavanga-citta remembers that object. Saññå never arises alone, it has to accompany citta and other cetasikas and it is conditioned by them. Saññå is saòkhåra dhamma, conditioned dhamma. Saññå arises with the citta and then falls away with the citta. Saññå is a khandha, it is one among the five khandhas. We cling to saññå, we take it for self. ***** [Ch.3 Perception(sa~n~naa)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 39043 From: abhidhammika Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 11:21pm Subject: Re: Please help me to find sutta with: Dear Agrios, Larry and all How are you? Please check "9.Baalapa.n.dita Suttam", Section 19, Nidaana Samyutta, Samyuttanikaayo. With regards, Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "agriosinski" wrote: "Yaya ca bhikkhave, avijjaya nivutassa balassa Yaya ca tanhaya samyuttassa ayam kayo samudagato" Bhikkhus, this body of the fool comes into existence being obstructed by ignorance, and being associated with craving. "Avijjupaladdhiya khandhe upalabbhati." If the ignorance is obtained, then the body is obtained. Could someone help me to find this suta please? metta, Agrios 39044 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 11:39pm Subject: 'The Gift of Dhamma....." Dear Antony, Rather than thank you off-list, I’d like others to have the opportunity to rejoice in your dana. ‘Great Disciples of the Buddha’ by Nyanaponika Thera And Hellmuth Hecker arrived today in excellent condition and I’m very grateful for it. Although I have some of the text in old Wheel copies, it’s wonderful to have the hard copy with the compilation of these gems and more. Well worth the wait;-). After joyfully opening the parcel and appreciating your kindness, I let the text fall open and it did so in the middle of the text at the introduction by B.Bodhi to Mahaakaccaana, the Master of Doctrinal Exposition on p.213. As I particularly like this introduction and account, let me quote from it, first with a quote from a little later in the text: ... "Monks, those monks who, like my son Maha Kaccana, guard the doors of the senses, are beloved both among gods and humans." He then pronounced the following stanza of the Dhammapada (v.94): "Even the gods hold him dear, Whose senses are subdued Like horses trained well by a charioteer, Whose pride is destroyed, And who is free from corruptions." That the Venerable Maha Kaccana was actually one who devoted much attention to the mastery of the sense faculties is borne out by his discourses, which (as we shall see below) often emphasize the need for guarding "the doors of the senses." ***** >1. Introduction As a skilled and versatile teacher with mastery over pedagogic technique, the Buddha adopted different styles of presentation to communicate the Dhamma to his disciples. Often he would explain a teaching in detail (vittharena). Having introduced his topic with a short statement, technically called the uddesa or synopsis, he would then embark on the detailed exposition, the niddesa, also called the analysis, the vibhanga. In this stage of the discourse he would break the subject introduced by the synopsis down into its component strands, define each strand in turn, and draw out its implications, sometimes attaching a simile to illustrate the message of the discourse. Finally, he would restate the introductory declaration as a conclusion (niggamana), now supported by the entire weight of the foregoing analysis. On other occasions, however, the Buddha would not teach in detail. Instead, he would present the Dhamma briefly (sankhittena), offering only a short, sometimes even cryptic, statement charged with a profound but highly concentrated meaning. The Buddha did not teach the Doctrine in this way in order to conceal an esoteric message or because he delighted in obscurantism. He used this technique because it sometimes proved a more effective means of shaking and transforming the minds of his auditors than would have been possible by a full elaboration. Although direct explanation of the meaning might have transmitted information more quickly, such a method might not have produced the lasting and edifying effect the Dhamma is intended to instil. But by requiring the disciples to reflect upon the meaning and to tease it out by sustained inquiry, as well as by mutual discussion, the Buddha ensured that when the disciples did come to understand his utterance, its message would penetrate deep into the silent recesses of the mind. While such brief teachings would escape the understanding of the great majority of the monks, the mature disciples with sharp faculties of wisdom could readily fathom their meaning. Under such circumstances the ordinary monks, reluctant to trouble their Master with requests for explanation, would turn for clarification to the senior disciples whose comprehension of the Dhamma had already been confirmed by the Blessed One. So important did this function become in the early Buddhist Sangha that the Buddha himself established, in the ranks of his most eminent disciples, a separate category called "the foremost of those who analyze in detail the meaning of what was stated (by me) in brief" (aggam sankhittena bhasitassa vittharena attham vibhajantanam). The bhikkhu who was assigned to this position by the Master was the Venerable Maha Kaccana -- Kaccana the Great, so called to distinguish him from others who bore the common brahmanical clan name of Kaccayana (shortened to Kaccana). ***** S: And here we have the explanation about how many of the ancient commentaries are attributed to the great disciples such as Maha Kaccna, (including both the Petakopadesa and the Nettippakarana*) in addition to many suttas including DSG favourites, the Bhaddekeratta Sutta (1)and the Madhupindika Sutta. Let me finish with popular quotes that can never be quoted enough from these suttas: (1)"Let not a person revive the past Or on the future build his hopes, For the past has been left behind And the future has not been reached. Instead with insight let him see Each presently arisen state; Let him know that and be sure of it, Invincibly, unshakeably.” (2)"Dependent on the eye and forms, eye-consciousness arises. The meeting of the three is contact. With contact as condition there is feeling. What one feels, that one perceives. What one perceives, that one thinks about. What one thinks about, that one mentally proliferates. With what one has mentally proliferated as the source, perceptions and notions tinged by mental proliferation beset a person with respect to past, future, and present forms cognizable through the eye." Metta, Sarah * “The Netti colophon states further that it was approved by the Blessed One and recited at the original Buddhist council*, though of course this is controversial here! ======= 39045 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 11:58pm Subject: Re: 'The Gift of Dhamma....." Dear Antony, Anumodana for your generous intention! This resulted in your providing the "Great Disciples of the Buddha' to Sarah and Jon. It was a lovely kind gesture. :-) I have this book myself and I know they will find it a valuable resource as well as an enjoyable read. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Dear Antony, > > Rather than thank you off-list, I'd like others to have the opportunity to > rejoice in your dana. `Great Disciples of the Buddha' by Nyanaponika Thera > And Hellmuth Hecker arrived today in excellent condition and I'm very > grateful for it. Although I have some of the text in old Wheel copies, > it's wonderful to have the hard copy with the compilation of these gems > and more. Well worth the wait;-). > > After joyfully opening the parcel and appreciating your kindness, I let > the text fall open and it did so in the middle of the text at the > introduction by B.Bodhi to Mahaakaccaana, the Master of Doctrinal > Exposition on p.213. 39046 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 1:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] bhavanga disturbed Hi Larry, op 30-11-2004 01:22 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > Light is not a direct object of consciousness. N: It depends. We can call that which is visible: colour, light or visible object. It is just that what appears through eyesense. L: If it were there would be > no need for eye sensitive matter. It is eye sensitive matter which > stretches from the eye to the heart base and manifests as a vibration > that is the object of eye consciousness and eye door process. N: The object of eye consciousness and eye door process is just visible object, nothing else, not a vibration. Defining and reasoning do not help much. You are seeing now. What? Just what is visible. You do not see eyesense at all. You do not see a vibration. The T.A. text is difficult to read and I do not like very much the word vibration since this can cause misunderstandings. I try my own wording. This is the text: My wording: visible object impinges on the eyesense, but there is not yet the experience of visible object by process cittas. The eyesense is arising in a group of rupas, the four great elements and other rupas. Groups of rupa of which the body consists are arising and falling away but they are connected. That is why the impact of visible object on the eyesense affects somehow the rupa which is heartbase and which is the support of the bhavanga-citta. The text uses the word vibration to indicate a connection between eyesense and heartbase. And then the stream of bhavanga-cittas is interrupted so that a process can begin. I would not use the word stretch out. I find this whole passage too difficult for me and it does not help me to understand the sense-cognitions appearing now. The bhavanga-cittas arise and fall away extremely fast and so we cannot know much about them. Nina. 39047 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 1:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: not so evil thoughts of good-hearted James. Dear friend James and Howard, op 29-11-2004 05:49 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@y...: quotes: wise attention cannot arise at the same time as the angry mind, > how could >> they occur together. But wise attention can arise just after anger > has >> fallen away. > Huh? Mindfulness of the present moment includes mindfulness of past > moments? Then what is the whole point of the slogan "Knowing the > dhammas appearing now"? (which, even though I agree with it in > principal, rubs me the wrong way because of the way it is used to > avoid formal practice). N: Yes, I know. I understand what you think. It must seem like a slogan, and I shall try again to say a few things. However, it is not so understandable when we define, reason about it, talk about the theory. I use the word: what appears now, not: what arises now. Why appear? A reality or dhamnma like anger appears to a moment of consciousness with wise attention. Anger has fallen away, it cannot know itself, but wise attention arises shortly afterwards. The same for hearing: hearing cannot know itself, it can only be known by another consciousness, arising after it has fallen away. Howard wrote to you: Yes, we can define sati as remembering what is wholesome, not to waste opportunities for it. There are different levels of this kind of memory, namely of dana, of sila, of samatha and of vipassana. This wholesome memory is different from the kind of memory arising with each citta. It is different from remembering that this is a tree, that is a desk. J: It seems to me that you are just talking > about plain mindfulness: The Four Foundations of Mindfulness. N: As I see it, The Four Foundations of Mindfulness contain all that is real and that the Buddha taught us to understand. But we have to learn step by step. Awareness is coarse at first, it cannot be refined. The Buddha said: seeing is impermanent. First we have to know the characteristic of seeing. It is different from thinking, different from hearing. Later on we can know its falling away. It can be done, if it were impossible, the Buddha would not tell us to realize the momentary impermanence of dhammas. Nina. 39048 From: antony272b2 Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 1:31am Subject: Re: 'The Gift of Dhamma....." Dear Sarah, One point I would like to add that is not in the book: "As the house was burning, Samavati and her maids-of-honour, numbering five hundred, kept on meditating. Thus, some of them attained Sakadagami Fruition, and the rest attained Anagami Fruition." http://www.buddhanet.net/budsas/ebud/dhp/a.htm#Samavati The main chapters that are not available as wheels at accesstoinsight are the life of Ananda and the life of Anuruddha. May you be well and happy, Antony. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Dear Antony, > > Rather than thank you off-list, I'd like others to have the opportunity to > rejoice in your dana. `Great Disciples of the Buddha' by Nyanaponika Thera > And Hellmuth Hecker arrived today in excellent condition and I'm very > grateful for it. Although I have some of the text in old Wheel copies, > it's wonderful to have the hard copy with the compilation of these gems > and more. Well worth the wait;-). > 39049 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 1:57am Subject: ."Feeling is just feeling" Dear Connie, Chris, Nina & All, We had a short discussion in Sikkhim about loneliness, anatta and being alone. I told Connie I'd type it out as I found it helpful. (Thanks to Chris and Nina for the good questions raised here). This followed earlier discussions about 'Engaged Buddhism', compassion and being proactive. Chris mentioned that anatta can seem very lonely and also rightly pointed out that we all like to be with others at times. ..... Khun Sujin: "Someone can be alone 'outside' and another could have so much piti (joy) with the understanding of realities by knowing that there's no self. Feeling is just feeling". ..... Nina: "It's so difficult, we cling so much to feeling."Feeling is just feeling". ..... Khun Sujin: "That's why the Buddha pointed out that attachment is to be eradicated or eliminated gradually until there is none left when one has become an arahant." .... Chris: "Just go slowly, not try to click a switch..." .... Khun Sujin: "Y-e-s. As one is sitting there is visible object, there is sound and it reminds oneself there is no understanding of all these realities yet. Knowing that, there's no time to feel lonely because panna and sati is there working their functions, developing understanding." Nina: "But when they don't arise...." Khun Sujin: "Lobha comes as your master, the Teacher." ***** S: I particularly appreciated the reminder that there's "no time to feel lonely" when there's sati and panna. No concern about oneself at these moments. Realities are just known for what they are. And then, lobha, the teacher comes again;-). Metta, Sarah ======= 39050 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 2:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Please help me to find sutta with: Dear Suan,Nina & Azita, Seeing your name, Suan, reminded me that I meant to thank you for your explanations in post #38509 which I understand. I also appreciated your post #38200 on Buddhaghosa. Nina, thank you also for helping with quotes in the discussion I was having with Htoo. I planned to continue the thread and may if I find some time;-). Your post on bhavanga cittas and the Vism were also very good. There was one extract in the Vism or Tika which perfectly answered a question Azita raised in Jetavana about how the bhavanga cittas come to be disturbed by the visible object or sense object before there is any experience of it (which didn't get an answer).....Ah, just found it: "Text Tiika: but how does there come to be disturbance (movement) of the life-continuum that has a different support? Because it is connected with it. And here the example is this: when grains of sugar are put on the surface of a drum and one of the grains of sugar is tapped, a fly sitting on another grain of sugar moves' (Pm. 478)." And without bhavanga cittas in between the sense and mind door experiences, there could be no sense door or mind door experiences. There have to be a continuity of cittas experiencing their objects. it doesn't matter what we call them, but it helps to undestand that there is phassa (contact) arising with every single citta, even whilst in deep sleep and that visible object doesn't just appear to a consciousness without any preceding cittas preparing the way, so to speak. 'But what appears now?' K.Sujin would say. Does phassa or bhavanga citta appear? If not, what does appear? Metta, Sarah ========= 39051 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 2:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" Hi KenO, (Suravira & All), --- Ken O wrote: > k: Sorry boss, forget about the 5fold part. You are right > supramundane is 8fold :). But satipatthana is for both supramundane > and mundane as those who are not yet Arahant, still have to practise > that. :) ... S: It's true about the practice. However, on a technical detail, I'm not sure that we can refer to supramundane lokuttara cittas as satipatthana. Vipassana, yes. .... > > k: Thanks for the clarification. I was trying to say that Nobles > One that are not Arahants, still have to have to do pariyati and > patipatti. I still have to say satipatthana is also supramundane as > lokuttara cittas are the emboidement of the perfection of the 8fold. ... S: We agree on all the important points. Pariyatti and patipatti have to continue until arahantship. I believe satipatthana refers to the mundane path. I think we discussed this before with regard to the Satipatthana Sutta, but I don't have any quote handy. I'll also be glad to be corrected if I'm wrong here.... On another note, I think others are discussing time and I liked a passage you quote from the Sammohavinodani (Dispeller) a lot. If there is clear understanding of the presently arising realities, (or present reality appearing to be accurate),and its conditioned nature, then the three periods of time are understood - it was that way in the past and it will be that way in the future, merely conditioned elements, not under the control of any self. On a tape I listened to, someone asked how the development of understanding and awareness could be known. The answer: by understanding the present reality. (Suravira, in English, K.Sujin uses the word 'reality' A LOT as you'll hear in the recordings presently being uploaded!) Ken O: >Delusion para 1171 - << then as he lays of the material aggregate, the immaterial aggregate become evident to him though the medium of the sense bases and doors. The material and immaterial, being laid hold of thus, are the pentad of aggregates, the pentad of aggregates is te twelve sense bases; the twelve sens bases become the 18 elements and so by mean of the aggregates, bases and elements, by making them into two parts like one who split a twin palm, he defines material-immateriality. After inquiring 'this mentality - materiality is not produced without causes, without conditions; it is produced with causes, with conditions. But what is its caused; what is its conditions?' he defines its condition thus: 'With ignorance as condition, craving as condition, kamma as condition, nutriment as condition' and he removes doubt about the three periods of time [of time thus]: 'In the past also they are conditions and states conditionaly arisen and in the future, and now also, they are conditions and states conditionally arisen. Beyond that there is no being or person. It is only a mere heap of formations. But this insight which discerns the formations is called "fulled understanding of the known" ***** Metta, Sarah ======== 39052 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 3:07am Subject: RE: [dsg] Contact Hi Evan, Welcome to DSG and I'm glad to see you jumping in the deep end here: --- Evan Stamatopoulos wrote: > I don't understand where in the sutta quotes below contact is described > as a mental phenomenon. From what I understand contact is the process > whereby a sense base and a sense object come together resulting in the > arising of consciousness. <...> L:> The Visuddhimagga refers to the following sutta in its description of > contact. This sutta metaphorically portrays contact as a mental > phenomenon similar to but distinct from consciousness. > > Here are a couple of snips: > "And how is the nutriment of contact to be regarded? Suppose a flayed > cow were to stand leaning against a wall. <...> I don't know if it helps, but under nutriment condition (aahaara paccaya), there are four kinds of nutriment, one physical and three mental: a) physical nutriment b) contact (phassa cetasika) c) volition (cetana cetasika) d) consciousness (vinnana or citta) Nina writes about them in more detail in her book 'Conditions' which can be found on here: http://www.zolag.co.uk/, Under contact as a kind of nutriment condition, she writes: ..... >As to the mental nutriment which is contact, phassa, this is a cetasika which contacts the object so that citta and the accompanying cetasikas can experience it*. Without contact citta and cetasikas could not experience any object, thus, contact supports them, it is a mental nutriment for them. It accompanies each citta and it conditions citta and the accompanying cetasikas by way of åhåra-paccaya, nutriment condition. It also conditions rúpa produced by citta and cetasikas by way of nutriment-condition. When there is bodily painful feeling we know that there is contact, otherwise there could not be the experience of an unpleasant object. This experience does not last. When hearing arises we know that there is another kind of contact; it contacts sound so that hearing can experience it. When there is mindfulness of realities as they appear one at a time, we can understand that there are different contacts all the time and that the experiences of the different objects do not last.< * Phassa is nama, it is not physical contact. ***** Evan, please tell us where you live or anything more about your interest or background with regard to your interest in the Dhamma (if you feel inclined to do so!). Also, you may like to look at some of the older posts on phassa kept aside under 'phassa' in U.P. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts Metta, Sarah ======= 39053 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 5:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 6 poems (really 9) Hi Rob M (Chris & Connie), --- robmoult wrote: CF:> > [...] The Lady now wears the gold robes of a fully ordained > Theravada > > Bhikkhuni [...] > > Connie:> > But IS she one? I'd sure like to believe it, but as many times as > I've > > gone around and around with it, I just don't. > RM:> I am going to butt in here with my two cents worth. > > It seems to me that if this person had been a man, there would have > been no question as to the legitimacy of his claim of being a full > fledged monk. ..... S:I'm butting in too. Wouldnt't that depend in either case on whether the full ordination procedures were carried out appropriately and whether the person intended to fully comply with all the Patimokkha rules as laid out by the Buddha in the Vinaya? I think the questions or 'closed minds' can be with many different motives, but I think there is room for legitimate concern and compassion for the consequences which will follow any serious breaches of these procedures and rules by those in robes. For example, the extremely large number of bhikkhus at Vesali who attempted to introduce seemingly minor adaptations to the Vinaya were said to have caused a schism in the order and the immediate result of splitting the Sangha is to be born without fail in one’s next life in hell. I don't know enough about the Vinaya to know what constitutes a schism and only one has really understood the Dhamma will really appreciate the Patimokkha sila in full, but just as we would not encourage a child to kill or steal, I would not encourage anyone to become a bhikkhu or bhikkhuni without a proper appreciation of the sila involved no matter how closed minded or in how small a minority I might appear. Kamma and its consequences is far more powerful than any ideas we may have about equal rights and opportunities, don't you think? From 'Banner of the Arahants' by Bhikkhu Khantipalo. 'Life as a Buddhist monk.' From Abhidhamma.org: "Thus have I heard. At one time the Exalted One was staying near Sávatthi at the Jeta Grove, Anáthapindika’s monastery. Then venerable Upáli approached the Exalted One, bowed down to him and then sat down nearby. Sitting there he asked the Exalted One, "Lord, what are the reasons why the rule of training was laid down for the disciples of the Tathágata and the Pátimokkha appointed?“ "For ten reasons, Upáli, the rule of training was laid down and the Pátimokkha appointed: 1. For the good establishment of the Sangha. (Without Vinaya the Sangha could not last long). 2. For the comfort of the Sangha. (So that Bhikkhus may have few obstacles and live peacefully). 3. For the riddance of obstinate men (who would cause trouble in the Sangha). 4. For the happy abiding of well-behaved Bhikkhus. (Pure precepts make for happiness here and now). 5. For guarding against troubles (ásava) in this present life (Since much trouble is avoided by one with good moral conduct). 6. For guarding against troubles liable to arise in a future life (They may not arise for the well-practised person). 7. For pleasing those not yet pleased. (People who do not yet know Dhamma are pleased by a Bhikkhu’s good conduct). 8. For the increase of those who are pleased. (Those who know Dhamma already are pleased to see it practised). 9. For the establishment of True Dhamma. (The Dhamma lasts long when Vinaya is well practised by Bhikkhus). 10. For the benefit of Vinaya. (So that Vinaya, ‘the leading out’, can benefit many beings, out of dukkha, towards Nibbána). These, Upáli, are the ten reasons why the rule of training was laid down and the Pátimokkha appointed for the disciples of the Tathágata“. Thus spoke the Lord. Delighted, venerable Upáli rejoiced in the Exalted One’s words." (Numerical Collection, Book of the Tens, Discourse 31). ***** RM:> I suspect that there are many monks, particularly in Asian countries > where Buddhism is the state religion, who may be less deserving to > wear the robes than this woman. > > Are we judging this person solely based on her gender? > > Are men any less susceptible to the psychological rationalizing that > Connie has described? .... S: It's true that we're all experts at rationalizing. However, if a man were considering or wishing to ordain as perhaps Connie is, wouldn't it be a kindness to encourage him to consider carefully as well, in respect to both initial ordination procedures and whether he's really suited to follow all the Patimokkha rules, easily and naturally? We had a good friend who disrobed after many vassa when he found out the ordination ceremony he had followed in Thailand had not been conducted correctly according to the details prescribed. As we all know, the ordination for bhikkhunis is very controversial in terms of validity. The rules for bhikkhunis are more numerous than those for the bhikkhus. There are 311 rules, I believe as laid down by the Buddha. They are given in detail in the first two books of the Vinaya Pitaka, with the account of how each was laid down, followed by the Buddha’s words which end with: "This offence does not lead to rousing of faith in those who are not convinced of the Teaching, nor to increase of faith in those who are convinced." Rob, any further comments? Metta, Sarah p.s witty-as-usual and bleached-out Connie, just read your second post- they need to be read out loud for full appreciation;-). Like you stress, our concerns on issues like this so often have more to do with ourselves than for women or bhikkhunis in general. I think this was the conclusion Jon and Chris reached at the end of a long chat on the same topic over a breakfast in Bangkok once, but Chris, Jon or Azita, pls remind me if it wasn't. ============= 39054 From: Ken O Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 5:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" Hi Sarah Maybe in a later date, I should discuss the technical level of satipatthana with you. I think it is a good topic to discuss. I think it is good time to take a real detail technical reading. The other time when Nina translate the commentary of the breathing sutta, I did not take a good look at it. Maybe we will have a relook at it, this time with inputs from the various Abhidhamma and sutta texts. Yes reality in the immediate moment is important yet I see many people trying to chase it or catch up with it or thinking the practise should be otherwise. When reality at the moment is attented wisely, there is development, there is abandoment. When you wrote the text <> That is I called an excellent statment. Dont try to chase the moments, live in reality of it :). Ken O 39055 From: Ken O Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 5:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhikkhu Khantipalo: Practical advice for Meditators (or newcomers to Buddhism) Hi Hugo Definitely study for the sake of study is for the academics and not for practitioner. And what is concentration? Is concentration just look at one kasina or it is something more interesting to do :). http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn35-099.html "Develop concentration, monks. A concentrated monk discerns things as they actually are present. And what does he discern as it actually is present? "He discerns, as it actually is present, that 'The eye is inconstant'... 'Forms are inconstant'... 'Eye-consciousness is inconstant'... 'Eye-contact is inconstant'... 'Whatever arises in dependence on eye-contact, experienced either as pleasure, as pain, or as neither-pleasure-nor-pain, that too is inconstant.' "He discerns, as it actually is present, that 'The ear is inconstant'... 'The nose is inconstant'... 'The tongue is inconstant'... 'The body is inconstant"... "He discerns, as it actually is present, that 'The intellect is inconstant'... 'Ideas are inconstant'... 'Intellect-consciousness is inconstant'... 'Intellect-contact is inconstant'... 'Whatever arises in dependence on intellect-contact, experienced either as pleasure, as pain, or as neither-pleasure-nor-pain, that too is inconstant.' "So develop concentration, monks. A concentrated monk discerns things as they actually are present." Then look at this sutta what still the mind http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn22-055.html "If a monk abandons passion for the property of form ... "If a monk abandons passion for the property of feeling ... "If a monk abandons passion for the property of perception ... "If a monk abandons passion for the property of fabrications ... "If a monk abandons passion for the property of consciousness, then owing to the abandonment of passion, the support is cut off, and there is no base for consciousness. Consciousness, thus unestablished, not proliferating, not performing any function, is released. Owing to its release, it stands still. Owing to its stillness, it is contented. Owing to its contentment, it is not agitated. Not agitated, he (the monk) is totally unbound right within. He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.' So abandons the passon first, stillness will surely arise without fail :). If concentration is the main factor in acquiring wisdom, Buddha would have attained enlightment when he learned the attainment of the arupas jhanas from his past two teachers (See MN 26). Ken O 39056 From: Larry Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 6:32am Subject: Sanna/Ken O --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > Hi Larry > > Sanna dont hide impermanence neither does memory in concept terms. > It is moha > > Ken O Hi Ken, I've been thinking about your objection and this is what I have come up with. Avijja is the ignorance of not knowing and the first link in dependent arising. This ignorance IS sanna. Sanna always makes a mistake, is always misknowledge, and is what perceives permanence. Moha is the ignorance of doubt. I have to say, with some considerable trepidation, the Buddha is simply wrong when he says dependent on feeling craving arises. He should have said dependent on perception craving arises. More generally we could say dependent on perception lobha, dosa, AND moha arise. In other words, dependent on perception accumulations and latent tendencies condition the arising of craving. You can see this for yourself in your own experience. Feeling is irrelevant. For the most part, the feeling that we feel is the feeling that accompanies the root cittas. You won't find the whole of this idea in sutta or abhidhamma, but the seeds of it come from Nina and her exposition on accumulations and latent tendencies. So all praise and misguided blame should go to Nina. Larry 39057 From: Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 1:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] Contact/TG - /Suravira/ Hi, Ken - In a message dated 11/30/04 12:50:08 AM Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@y... writes: > Hi Howard, > > This pellet sphere is an interesting project, but it needs a lot of > work. I don't know about 'one blue and four shades of red.' Your > original idea of one blue and five (one for each sense door) reds > was better, I think. --------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, here's the problem with the total of 6 ( = 1 + 5 ) types of dhamma, the types being the mind-door type (say a red pellet), and the five physical sense-door types (say blue pellets): As far as the dhammas are concerned, each pellet popping through the aperture causing blue to light up, then needs to be recycled and pop through yet again, with the aperture lighting up red! ;-) So, I then switched to a new construction, with pellets colored and aperture lighting up according to khandha: The blue pellets are rupas, the red pellets are namas of one of four types, vedana, sa~n~na, sankhara, and vi~n~nana, and the aperture lights up accordingly - blue light for a blue pellet, i.e., rupa object, whether through physical sense-door or mind-door), and four different red lights, one for each type of red pellet, i.e., each type of nama object. Since this is a "wordling model", there is no nibbana pellet, and no corresponding red light. ;-)) ------------------------------------------------ > But then you have to remember that there are > three rupas that are capable of arising at the body-door, so that > makes seven reds by my reckoning. And then there are fifty-four > namas that can arise at the mind door. And there are the doors > themselves and other namas and rupas that only arise at the mind > door. And what about concepts? I would make them black, and you > would make them the fifty-fifth shade of red, I think. (We are never > going to agree on that one.) > > Perhaps I'm taking it all too seriously, but there are problems > everywhere I look. The whole project should be scrapped before it > gets out of hand! > ------------------------------------- Howard: Certainly not!! This is far too important to let go of! Why, so much has been invested in the project already!! I think, taking a lead from every govermental agency in the world, that having squandered (er, I mean "devoted") so much of our resources to this project already, we must now force everyone to "do their part" in this essential work, and commandeer additional resources from all!! -------------------------------------- > > :-) > Ken H > > ========================= With "modest proposal" metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39058 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 7:32am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 142 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, Among 54 kamavacara cittas or 54 sensuous consciousness, 24 cittas are called sobhana cittas or beautiful consciousness. They are 8 mahakusala cittas, 8 mahavipaka cittas, and 8 mahakiriya cittas. Mahakiriya cittas are cittas of arahats and these cittas are far from us. There are 8 mahavipaka cittas. Again these 8 vipaka cittas are the cittas of our patisandhi or bhavanga and they sound like unconscious mind of us. So 8 mahakusala cittas are the most apparent to us and easily understandable. These cittas are the moment that we are performing wholesome actions while doing bodily or verbally or mentally. We have been discussing at molecular level aft?r we have discussed at atomic level of Dhamma. At molecular level, we have dealt with 40 lokuttara cittas and 27 mahaggata cittas. Now we will see what 8 mahakusala cittas are. 8 mahakusala cittas are dhamma molecules made up of dhamma atoms called citta and 38 cetasikas. This is especially right for the first pair of mahakusala cittas. They are 1. somanassa saha gatam nana sampayuttam asankharika mekam 2. somanassa saha gatam nana sampayuttam sasankharika mekam Here 'mekam' refers to 'ekam' and this means 'one'. This is a Pali rule. So these 2 mean 1. somanassa saha gatam nana sampayuttam asankharika citta 2. somanassa saha gatam nana sampayuttam sasankharika citta Somanassa is made up of 'so' meaning 'good' 'pleasurable' 'right' and mana means 'mind' 'heart' 'consciousness' and assa just shows possession. So overall 'somanassa' means 'mental joy' or similar meaning. Saha means 'at the same time' 'concurrently' 'in parallel with' and gata means 'to go'. So somanassa saha gatam means ''along with mental joy''. Nana means 'pannindriya cetasika' 'panna' 'wisdom' 'knowledge'. Sampayutta is made up of 'sam' which means 'well' 'thoroughly' and and 'yutta' which means 'mix'. Sampayutta means 'mixed' as if in case of milk and water. So the above citta is 'along with mental joy' and inseparably mixed with wisdom or panna. And asankharika means 'without special preparation'. Sankharika means 'being prepared' 'being prompted' 'being stimulated'. So asankharika means 'without any prompt'. Over all, this first kamavacara citta has the meaning.. ' a mental state associated with mental joy the whole of which is inseparably mixed with wisdom or panna and no one or nothing has stimulated or prompted'. This has actually been explained in the citta portion. But here it is re-explained again to explain why 38 cetasikas accompany this citta. One atom is citta which is totally pure and luminous. Other atoms are 38 cetasikas in this first kamavacara citta. They are 1. 7 universal cetasikas 1.phassa/contact, 2.vedana/feeling, 3.cetana/volition, 4.sanna/perception, 5.ekaggata/one-pointedness, 6.jivitindriya/mental life, 7.manasikara/attention 2. 6 particular cetasikas or pakinnaka cetasikas 1.vitakka/initial application, 2.vicara/sustained application 3.piti/joy, 4. viriya/effort, 5.chanda/wish, 6.adhimokkha/decision Here as all cittas are accompanied by 7 cetasikas, there is no comment on this. In kusala citta, if there is somanassa then piti has to arise and therefore all 6 particular cetasikas have to arise. 3. 25 sobhana cetasikas or beautiful cetasikas 2 teams of forces of the king citta that is in total 19 universal cetasikas of sobhana cittas, 3 virati cetasikas, 2 appamanna cetasikas and pannindriya cetasika (19+3+2+1= 25 sobhana cetasikas) As this citta is somanassa there is piti. As it is nana sampayutta, there is pannindriya cetasika. So all in all 7+6+25= 38 cetasikas can arise with this 1st kama sobhana citta. This shows maximal possible cetasikas. As there are isotopes in chemistry, there are 1st mahakusala cittas with different combinations of cetasikas. All 38 cetasikas never arise in full 38. Because karuna and mudita cetasikas never arise together as their objects are totally different. So if someone is having karuna on someone, this mahakusala citta has 37 cetasikas. Mudita is excluded. If mudita, karuna is excluded and there will be 37 cetasikas. If beings do not do any of karuna or mudita, then both cetasikas do not arise and there will be only 36 cetasikas. 2 cetasikas karuna and mudita are also known as aniyata yogi cetasikas. This means they do not always arise. Again, when beings are not practising kayaducarita, or vaci-ducarita, or dujiva, then they are said to be practising samma-kammanta or samma-vaca or samma-ajiva respectively. Again these 3 do not arise concurrently in kamavacara cittas. So from 36 cetasikas, 2 has to be removed as they are not being practised. These 3 are also aniyata yogi cetasikas. Again these 3 are mutually exclusive each other. That is when one arises the other 2 cannot arise. So there left 34 cetasikas. This is exploration down to atomic level of citta and cetasikas. In incoming kama sobhana cittas, these explorations will be left out. So leaving these contemplations, the first pair of mahakusala cittas has 38 total cetasikas and when these 38 cetasikas arise then the citta is called 'somanassa saha gatam nana sampayutta asankharika/ sasankharika citta'. There is no cetasika difference between asankharika and sasankharika citta. But the power is not the same. This will be explained in later posts. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39059 From: Ken O Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 7:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi Larry I am not objecting. Sanna is just marking. Simple as that :). If sanna is ignorance, D.O will have start as Sanna and not ignorance. > I have to say, with some considerable trepidation, the Buddha is > simply wrong when he says dependent on feeling craving arises. He > should have said dependent on perception craving arises. More > generally we could say dependent on perception lobha, dosa, AND > moha arise. In other words, dependent on perception accumulations and latent tendencies condition the arising of craving. You can see > this for yourself in your own experience. Feeling is irrelevant. For the most part, the feeling that we feel is the feeling that accompanies the root cittas. k: Larry sometimes you amaze me :) by your own convictions. As I say before, let see the text what they say and not to have our own conclusion. Our own experience can be very unreliable, dont you think so :). Do you think you will crave for something that doesn't not feel good :). Ken O 39060 From: agriosinski Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 8:14am Subject: Re: Please help me to find sutta with: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "abhidhammika" wrote: > Dear Agrios, Larry and all > > How are you? > > Please check "9.Baalapa.n.dita Suttam", Section 19, Nidaana Samyutta, > Samyuttanikaayo. > > > With regards, > > Suan Lu Zaw > Hi Suan Lu Zaw and Larry, thank you for your help. I am quite lost when it comes to understand consequences of avija. This "body creation" is taking place after present body is dead, or rather in every moment of avija manifesting itsef? It seems like it is in every moment creation resulting in obtaining body at death of the last citta. Is that the case? Does it mean there is no body apart from what we create? metta, Agrios 39061 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 8:18am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 143 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, At the bottom is encouragement for asking of questions whatever light they are or whatever heavy they are. Whatever be will be, Dhamma Thread will be ongoing for all. The first 2 cittas of 24 kama sobhana cittas have been examined at molecular level. The next 2 cittas or the next pair is nana vippayutta cittas. They are 1. somanassa saha gatam nana vippayuttam asankharika citta 2. somanassa saha gatam nana vippayuttam sasankharika citta Here new Pali word is 'vippayuttam'. Vippayutta means 'without mixing'. So there is no pannindriya cetasika in this pair. So from 38 possible cetasikas, panna is removed and they will be 37 cetasikas. The implications are the same as in the first pair that is nana sampayutta cittas. The third pair is nana sampayutta cittas. So panna is refilled in 37 and then it becomes 38 cetasikas. But this pair is upekkha saha gatam cittas. They are.. 1. upekkha saha gatam nana sampayuttam asankharika citta 2. upekkha saha gatam nana sampayuttam sasankharika citta So there is no joy or piti at all. So piti has to be removed again from 38 and there will be 37 cetasikas as cetasika atoms of this kama sobhana citta molecule. The fourth pair is nana vippayutta cittas. So from 37 cetasikas of the third pair of cittas, panna cetasika has to be removed. So there is a citta and that citta is accompanied by 36 cetasikas and this make the molecule of upekkha saha gatam nana vippayutta cittas. So in 8 mahakusala cittas, cetasikas are in the 1. first pair __ 38 cetasikas( 7 + 6 + 19 + 3 + 2 + 1 = 38 ) 2. second pair __ 37 cetasikas( 7 + 6 + 19 + 3 + 2 + 0 = 37 ),no nana 3. third pair __ 37 cetasikas( 7 + 5 + 19 + 3 + 2 + 1 = 37 ),no piti 4. fourth pair __ 36 cetasikas( 7 + 5 + 19 + 3 + 2 + 0 = 36 ) no piti and no nana 3 are 3 virati cetasikas and they are samma-kammanta, samma-vaca, samma-ajiva. 2 are 2 appamanna cetasikas and they are karuna and mudita. These do not always arise with kusala cittas. There are kusala cittas without karuna and without mudita at all. Again when arise these 2 cetasikas do not arise together and they are mutually exclusive. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39062 From: Hugo Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 8:32am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hello Christine, Sorry for jumping in. On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 21:36:07 -0000, christine_forsyth wrote: > I am somewhat confused here. Smiling is one of the earliest forms > of non-verbal communication - used by humans and closely related > other species. I am at a loss to understand in what way feigning > friendliness or happiness is honest communication. I know I would > not trust someone whose verbal signals were a pretense, and were not > truthful/real. Perhaps you can help me to understand your > perspective on this? Or maybe give the link to any research? I don't think that Bhante Vimalaramsi wants you to fake, I think he means that by "forcing" a smile is a way to generate good feelings. I read the book "Destructive Emotions", but I don't have it with me anymore so I can't quote it, in that book different scientists (including Paul Ekman, who is famous for his facial/emotions analysis) talks about the relationship between body and emotions, and how one can call the other. So, if you are happy, you smile, but also if you smile, you will make happiness arise. But, don't trust them, try it for yourself, I did it and I have asked my wife to do it, and it works!! The experiment? Wait until you are angry or upset at something or somebody, then immediately as you notice that anger to arise, force yourself to smile, do not try to fight the angry feeling by saying "I am happy, I am happy", no, don't fight, just force your face muscles to smile, just be sure to make them work out a natural smile (well, as natural as it can be), don't force them into a sarcastic smile or anything, just as natural as it can be. Then, notice what follows after a few seconds. Is your anger level still the same? Anywa, I found the following link that might provide some information, but I still recommend the book I mentioned above: http://www.journals.apa.org/prevention/volume3/pre0030002c.html "The phenomenon is delightfully subtle. Saying the phonemes e and ah, which activate smiling muscles, puts people in a better mood than saying the German ü, which activates muscles associated with negative emotions (Zajonc, Murphy, & Inglehart, 1989). Simply activating one of the smiling muscles by holding a pen in the teeth (rather than with the lips, which activates a frowning muscle) is enough to make cartoons seem more amusing (Strack, Martin, & Stepper, 1988). A heartier smile, made not just with the mouth but with raised cheeks as well, works even better (Ekman, Davidson, & Friesen, 1990). Smile warmly on the outside, and you feel better on the inside. Scowl, and the whole world seems to scowl back. It works with posture, too. Sara Snodgrass and her associates (Snodgrass, Higgins, & Todisco, 1986) observed the behavior feedback phenomenon with walking behavior. When taking long strides, with arms swinging and eyes straight ahead, people feel happier than when taking short, shuffling steps, with eyes downcast." :-) -- Hugo 39063 From: Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 3:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi, Ken & Larry - In a message dated 11/30/04 11:00:56 AM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: > > Hi Larry > > I am not objecting. Sanna is just marking. Simple as that :). If > sanna is ignorance, D.O will have start as Sanna and not ignorance. > > > >I have to say, with some considerable trepidation, the Buddha is > >simply wrong when he says dependent on feeling craving arises. He > >should have said dependent on perception craving arises. More > >generally we could say dependent on perception lobha, dosa, AND > >moha arise. In other words, dependent on perception accumulations > and latent tendencies condition the arising of craving. You can see > >this for yourself in your own experience. Feeling is irrelevant. > For the most part, the feeling that we feel is the feeling that > accompanies the root cittas. > > k: Larry sometimes you amaze me :) by your own convictions. As I > say before, let see the text what they say and not to have our own > conclusion. Our own experience can be very unreliable, dont you > think so :). Do you think you will crave for something that doesn't > not feel good :). > > > > > Ken O > > ========================= Ken, I think Larry is correct, but, of course, the Buddha is most certainly also correct. In the D.O. scheme, vedana --> tanha is the standard formulation. This formulation, however, is simply not as detailed as can be obtained by filling in additional links between feeling and craving. There is another sutta, MN 18, in which a conditionality chain including sa~n~na and based in vedana is provided. What is said there is the following: ------------------------------------ Dependent on the eye and visible forms arises eye-consciousness. The coming together of the three is contact. Due to contact there is feeling. What one feels, one perceives. What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one proliferates about. What one proliferates about is the source from which ideas derived from the proliferation of perceptions beset a person regarding past, future, and present visible forms cognizable by the eye [and so on].’ ------------------------------------ So, what we have here is vedana --> sa~n~na --> papa~nca. If this is put together with the D.O. linkage of vedana --> tanha, one obtains the longer chain: vedana --> sa~n~na --> papa~nca --> tanha. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39064 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 8:44am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 144 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, In 8 mahakusala cittas there are 1st pair of cittas both are somanassa and nana sampayutta cittas and there are 38 cetasikas. In the 2nd pair, cittas are nana vipayutta and there are 37 cetasikas. In the 3rd pair, piti is removed and nana is present. So there are 37 cetasikas. In the 4th pair of cittas there are not piti and nana and there are 36 cetasikas. ( 38, 37, 37, 36 ). There are 8 mahavipaka cittas. As there are other vipaka cittas these 8 cittas are named as mahavipaka cittas. Other vipaka cittas are rupavipaka cittas, arupavipaka cittas, ahetuka vipaka cittas in loki cittas and phala cittas or lokuttara vipaka cittas. Vipaka means 'resultant'. What we see right now or what we hear right now or what we smell right now or what we taste right now or what we touch right now are all vipaka cittas and these 5 sense consciousness are all ahetuka vipaka cittas. Cittas are 'mental states with different emotional and other mental qualities.' 8 mahavipaka cittas are not of 5 sense consciousness. But when we are active and conscious that is when cittas are in vithi vara, these 8 mahavipaka cittas do the job of tadarammana cittas which are retention consciousness which follow mental impulse which again arises from these mentioned 5 sense consciousness. When we are sleeping in deep rest, these 8 mahavipaka cittas do the job of bhavanga cittas. Actually one of these 8 mahavipaka cittas is our first citta in this very life and that citta is called patisandhi citta. This patisandhi citta determined what the being should be. If patisandhi citta is one of these 8 mahavipaka cittas then the being has to be a human or a deva of one of 6 deva realms. These 8 mahavipaka cittas at atomic level are a citta and combination of 33 different cetasikas. This is right especially for the 1st pair of 8 mahavipaka cittas. These 33 cetasikas are 7 universal cetasikas, 6 pakinnaka cetasikas, 19 universal sobhana cetasikas and 1 pannindriya cetasika ( 7 + 6 + 19 + 1 = 33 cetasikas ). The 1st pair is 1. somanassa saha gatam nana sampayuttam asankharika mahavipaka citta 2. somanassa saha gatam nana sampayuttam sasankharika mahavipaka citta They are accompanied by 33 cetasikas. One atom is pure citta and other 33 atoms are accompnying cetasikas. They make a molecule called 'somanassa saha gatam nana sampayuttam asankharika citta' or 'sasankharika citta'. These cittas are resultant cittas of the first pair of 8 mahakusala cittas in the past. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39065 From: Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 3:50am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi, Hugo (and Christine, and Bhante) - In a message dated 11/30/04 11:38:58 AM Eastern Standard Time, eklektik@g... writes: > > Hello Christine, > > Sorry for jumping in. > > On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 21:36:07 -0000, christine_forsyth > wrote: > >I am somewhat confused here. Smiling is one of the earliest forms > >of non-verbal communication - used by humans and closely related > >other species. I am at a loss to understand in what way feigning > >friendliness or happiness is honest communication. I know I would > >not trust someone whose verbal signals were a pretense, and were not > >truthful/real. Perhaps you can help me to understand your > >perspective on this? Or maybe give the link to any research? > > I don't think that Bhante Vimalaramsi wants you to fake, I think he > means that by "forcing" a smile is a way to generate good feelings. ======================== Yes, I think so. Bhante puts great emphasis, it seems to me, on the mind-body relationship, with bodily conditions affecting mental conditions just as much as the reverse. Leigh Brasington, the jhana teacher, in teaching cultivation of joy, so important in that context, instructs students to meditate with a serene smile on one's face. If you will, one could view this as a kind of behaviorist technique. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39066 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 9:18am Subject: Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Dear Hugo, Christine, and All, Hugo,it is good to read about your philosophical matters of philosophers. But I do not believe these are Dhamma. Do you think that cittas can be created? Do you think that cittas can be abolished? Do you think that cetasikas can be created? Do you think that cetasikas can be abolished? Do you think that rupas can be created? Do you think that rupas can be abolished? Do you think that nibbana can be created? Do you think that nibbana can be abolished? Smile as we know is a complex phenomena. Whatever philosopher prefer, evrything is within dhamma and they must be citta or cetasika or rupa. If not they are not realities. Smile Let us have a look. You may see someone smiles. What you see is light and it is ruparammana. Again that smiling person has the emotion of smiling. This is intrinsically known through through manodvara as dhammarammana which is kayavinatti rupa. The smiling face has kayavinatti rupa at the time of smiling. What you hear someone laughing is voice and it is saddarammana. But there is vacivinatti rupa which does not go through ear but through manodvara. What actually happen in that smiling person will be depend on what he is developing and what he is. If he is an arahat then at the smile there arises hasituppada citta which take the base of heart or hadaya rupa. If not arahat, there are 2 possibilities. One is akusala citta and another is kusala citta. Not every smile is good. There are 1. akusala smile 2. kusala smile 3. abyakata smile ( kiriya smile ) Regarding smile, there is no citta that smiles apart from these 3 kinds. They are 4 lobha mula cittas which are akusala smile, 4 mahakusala smile, 4 mahakiriya smile, 1 ahetuka kiriya smile altogether 13 cittas can cause smile. 'Somanassa javanaani panettha terasa hasanampi janenti'. Do you think these smiling cittas can be created? If there is no wisdom or panna one even cannot distinguish between akusala and kusala smile. By the same token, when there is no panna one cannot distinguish between akusala piti and kusala piti. May you be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Hugo wrote: > Hello Christine, > > Sorry for jumping in. > > On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 21:36:07 -0000, christine_forsyth > wrote: > > I am somewhat confused here. Smiling is one of the earliest forms > > of non-verbal communication - used by humans and closely related > > other species. I am at a loss to understand in what way feigning > > friendliness or happiness is honest communication. I know I would > > not trust someone whose verbal signals were a pretense, and were not > > truthful/real. Perhaps you can help me to understand your > > perspective on this? Or maybe give the link to any research? > > I don't think that Bhante Vimalaramsi wants you to fake, I think he > means that by "forcing" a smile is a way to generate good feelings. > > I read the book "Destructive Emotions", but I don't have it with me > anymore so I can't quote it, in that book different scientists > (including Paul Ekman, who is famous for his facial/emotions analysis) > talks about the relationship between body and emotions, and how one > can call the other. > > So, if you are happy, you smile, but also if you smile, you will make > happiness arise. > > But, don't trust them, try it for yourself, I did it and I have asked > my wife to do it, and it works!! > > The experiment? > > Wait until you are angry or upset at something or somebody, then > immediately as you notice that anger to arise, force yourself to > smile, do not try to fight the angry feeling by saying "I am happy, I > am happy", no, don't fight, just force your face muscles to smile, > just be sure to make them work out a natural smile (well, as natural > as it can be), don't force them into a sarcastic smile or anything, > just as natural as it can be. > > Then, notice what follows after a few seconds. Is your anger level > still the same? > > Anywa, I found the following link that might provide some information, > but I still recommend the book I mentioned above: > > http://www.journals.apa.org/prevention/volume3/pre0030002c.html > > "The phenomenon is delightfully subtle. Saying the phonemes e and ah, > which activate smiling muscles, puts people in a better mood than > saying the German ü, which activates muscles associated with negative > emotions (Zajonc, Murphy, & Inglehart, 1989). Simply activating one of > the smiling muscles by holding a pen in the teeth (rather than with > the lips, which activates a frowning muscle) is enough to make > cartoons seem more amusing (Strack, Martin, & Stepper, 1988). A > heartier smile, made not just with the mouth but with raised cheeks as > well, works even better (Ekman, Davidson, & Friesen, 1990). Smile > warmly on the outside, and you feel better on the inside. Scowl, and > the whole world seems to scowl back. It works with posture, too. Sara > Snodgrass and her associates (Snodgrass, Higgins, & Todisco, 1986) > observed the behavior feedback phenomenon with walking behavior. When > taking long strides, with arms swinging and eyes straight ahead, > people feel happier than when taking short, shuffling steps, with eyes > downcast." > > :-) > -- > Hugo 39067 From: Hugo Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 9:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhu Khantipalo: Practical advice for Meditators (or newcomers to Buddhism) Hello Christine, On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 19:08:20 -0000, christine_forsyth wrote: > You may be interested in a little more about the former Khantipalo > Bhikkhu - now Mr. Lawrence Mills - and an update on what he is doing > nowadays. He was born in Britain in 1932, was a Buddhist Theravada > monk from 1959-1991. Thanks for the info on Khantipalo Bhikkhu. More than 30 years, then became married? I understand that in Thailand, and perhaps other countries men become monks for a short period of time then go back to lay life. But after 30 years? Does anybody know if it is a rare situation or if it is common occurrence? I would expect that after 30 years of being a monk and practice you would be more convinced and wouldn't even think on returning to lay life. But more interesting is the fact that he went back to lay life, but still teach Buddhism, so it seems that he still "believes" in Buddhism. I am puzzled and amazed by this. Thanks again for the info, -- Hugo 39068 From: Ken O Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 9:55am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi Christine and Hugo As I said countless times, follow the text. If the text said that you should smile to develop joy, sure go ahead. Are we so sure this smile is not conditioned by lobha mula cittas, and are we so sure when this smile will produced a joy that is also not lobha mula citta. If we are not sure, then we better stick to develop insight of the three characteristics because this is the best way for not doing the wrong thing. The only thing so far I know that will not go wrong is wise attention of reality of the moment (but this must be natural, dont think to try to do it purposely :-) ). Ken O p.s. Buddha and Arahant have smiling cittas - see U.P. 39069 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 10:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhikkhu Khantipalo: Practical advice for Meditators (or newcomers to Buddhism) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > Hi Hugo > > Definitely study for the sake of study is for the academics and not > for practitioner. > > And what is concentration? Is concentration just look at one kasina > or it is something more interesting to do :). Friend Ken O, I find this to be an excellent post! Good sutta quotes to support an important conclusion: Concentration alone doesn't lead to insight, concentration which leads to dispassion leads to insight. Excellent!! Metta, James 39070 From: Ken O Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 10:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhikkhu Khantipalo: Practical advice for Meditators (or newcomers to Buddhism) Hi James If concentration leads to dispassion then to insight. I think our Buddha would have been enlighted when he met the two teachers and dont need to torture himself so much before he become enlighted Please read the last statement I make during my last post on this. Ken O 39071 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 10:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 61 - Perception/Sa~n~naa (h) Hi Larry, op 28-11-2004 17:20 schreef Larry op LBIDD@w...: > Nina: "What we take for `our memory' or `our recognition' > is not one moment which stays, but many different moments of > saññå which arise and fall away. Because of saññå past experiences > and also concepts and names are remembered, people and things > are recognized." L: This is a good point. Memory is just a moment of memory. The same > thing could be said of a sign or concept. These are moments of > consciousness. N: Sign, nimitta, and concept, paññatti are objects of the citta which thinks. > L:It occured to me this morning that memory hides impermanence. N: As Ken O said: moha hides. Also lobha and wrong view play their parts. L:Maybe > one of the reasons Ananda took so long to realize nibbana is because > he was so involved with memory he didn't pay enough attention to > impermanence. N: He was an ariyan, thus he had realized the three characteristics. He realized arahatship after the Buddha's parinibbana. He had spent the time outside on the walk and was agitated. Co to Minor Readings, V, the Good Omen Discourse: <...Now my energy is over-exerted and so my cognizance tends to agitation. I shall therefore see to balancing my energy...> He was going to take a rest. His feet had left the floor, but his head had not reached the pillow. in that interval he became an arahat. Nina. 39072 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 10:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" Dear Sarah, op 30-11-2004 11:50 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...: > I believe satipatthana refers to the mundane > path. I think we discussed this before with regard to the Satipatthana > Sutta, but I don't have any quote handy. N: Yes, we discussed that when studying with Larry the Satipatthana Sutta and commentary. It is mundane. And vipassana: goes up to lokuttara. Nina. 39073 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 10:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] ."Feeling is just feeling" Dear Sarah, Thank you for the quotes. op 30-11-2004 10:57 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...: > Khun Sujin: "Lobha comes as your master, the Teacher." > ***** > S: I particularly appreciated the reminder that there's "no time to feel > lonely" when there's sati and panna. No concern about oneself at these > moments. Realities are just known for what they are. And then, lobha, the > teacher comes again;-). N: It is so difficult for all of us to recognize lobha, the teacher. Let alone speaking about this to others. You can only sense this when a good friend has pointed this out. People may not like to admit the truth. Nina. 39074 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 10:40am Subject: [dsg] Re: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 61 - Perception/Sa~n~naa (h) Dear Nina, Is that Venerable Ananda? I mean arahat who attained arahatta magga nana out of 4 postures that is not walking, not standing, not sitting, not lying. With respect, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > Hi Larry, > op 28-11-2004 17:20 schreef Larry op LBIDD@w...: > > Nina: "What we take for `our memory' or `our recognition' > > is not one moment which stays, but many different moments of > > saññå which arise and fall away. Because of saññå past experiences > > and also concepts and names are remembered, people and things > > are recognized." > L: This is a good point. Memory is just a moment of memory. The same > > thing could be said of a sign or concept. These are moments of > > consciousness. > N: Sign, nimitta, and concept, paññatti are objects of the citta which > thinks. > > > L:It occured to me this morning that memory hides impermanence. > N: As Ken O said: moha hides. Also lobha and wrong view play their parts. > L:Maybe > > one of the reasons Ananda took so long to realize nibbana is because > > he was so involved with memory he didn't pay enough attention to > > impermanence. > N: He was an ariyan, thus he had realized the three characteristics. He > realized arahatship after the Buddha's parinibbana. He had spent the time > outside on the walk and was agitated. > Co to Minor Readings, V, the Good Omen Discourse: > <...Now my energy is over-exerted and so my cognizance tends to agitation. I > shall therefore see to balancing my energy...> > He was going to take a rest. His feet had left the floor, but his head had > not reached the pillow. in that interval he became an arahat. > Nina. 39075 From: Hugo Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 10:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 17:18:15 -0000, htootintnaing wrote: > Hugo,it is good to read about your philosophical matters of > philosophers. But I do not believe these are Dhamma. I know that when I feel angry or upset, and force myself to smile, the anger diminishes or dissappears. I know that when I asked my wife to do the same one day she was angry at something (don't remember what), the same happened. That's what I know. Anger is one of the three poisons, when anger arises, this "forced smile" method makes it "go away", "diminish", "not flourish", "not make me do unskillful acts", use whatever phrase you think is proper. If the relationship of the above with the Buddha Dhamma is still not obvious, let me quote: There are these four right exertions. Which four? There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, arouses persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen... for the sake of the abandoning of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen... for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen...(and) for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen. These are the four right exertions. Just as the River Ganges flows to the east, slopes to the east, inclines to the east, in the same way when a monk develops & pursues the four right exertions, he flows to Unbinding, slopes to Unbinding, inclines to Unbinding. -- SN XLIX.1 Also: And what is the exertion to abandon? There is the case where a monk does not acquiesce to a thought of sensuality that has arisen [in him]. He abandons it, destroys it, dispels it, wipes it out of existence. He does not acquiesce to a thought of ill will... a thought of harmfulness... any evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen [in him]. He abandons them, destroys them, dispels them, wipes them out of existence. This is called the exertion to abandon. -- AN IV.14 More quotes at: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/wings/2c.html > If there is no wisdom or panna one even cannot distinguish between > akusala and kusala smile. I am not interested in distinguishing anything, Paul Ekman is, not me. I am not analizing the smile per se in "me" or in any "other", I don't care how the smile looks or how it is produced. I am interested in "abandoning" the angry state. -- Hugo 39076 From: Hugo Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 10:53am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 17:55:31 +0000 (GMT), Ken O wrote: > As I said countless times, follow the text. I guess you meant: ....follow the text BLINDLY. > If the text said that > you should smile to develop joy, sure go ahead. If your mind is all perturbed by anger, and smiling is ONE way (not the only, just one) to make it abandon anger, but smile is not in the text, should I not do that? Why not do the following: 1) Smile (or whatever works for you in order to calm your mind). 2) Once calmed, observe what defilements are in the mind. 3) Once identified the defilements, work in abandoning them. > Are we so sure this > smile is not conditioned by lobha mula cittas, and are we so sure > when this smile will produced a joy that is also not lobha mula > citta. If we are not sure, then we better stick to develop insight > of the three characteristics because this is the best way for not > doing the wrong thing. mmmmm.... I think we are approaching this from different points, you are analizing the smile per se. I am looking after the result that smiling produces on "me", which is to tranquil the mind so I can work on it, similar to applying an anesthetic before surgery. Just don't get attached to the smile, nor to the anesthetic! -- Hugo 39077 From: Hugo Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 0:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhikkhu Khantipalo: Practical advice for Meditators (or newcomers to Buddhism) On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 18:12:03 +0000 (GMT), Ken O wrote: > > Hi James > > If concentration leads to dispassion then to insight. I think our > Buddha would have been enlighted when he met the two teachers and > dont need to torture himself so much before he become enlighted > > Please read the last statement I make during my last post on this. I agree with Ken. Somewhere I read that concentration is what is needed to hold the microscope of the insight still enough in order to see Dhamma. But holding the microsocope without looking into the lens doesn't help you. Scientist 1: "Hey, I can hold the microscope still for 2 hours!" Scientist 2: "Good, what have you discovered?" Scientist 1: "I have discovered that I can hold it still for 2 hours". Scientist 2: "Have you tried to look through the lens?" Scientist 1: "Lens?, why, it is really cool that I can hold it still for 2 hours" Scientist 3: "Hey, I am trying to look through the lens, but it keeps moving". Scientist 2: "What are you going to do about it?" Scientist 3: "I am going to move at the same speed as the microscope, so when I peek through the lens I can see what is at the other end". Scientist 2: "Why don't you try to hold it still, before you look through it?". Scientist 3: "Why?, it is fascinating to try to calculate the speed of its movement, and try to coordinate my peeking with it" Scientist 2 goes to yet another microscope, takes a few minutes to stabilize it, then goes and peeks through the lens and says: "Hey guys, this is great!!!, come and see". Scientist 1: "I can't, if I let loose the microscope, I won't be able to........wait a minute!". Scientist 3: "I can't, I am almost there, I think I can see through the lens....now.....no, ok.....now.....still can't.....ok....now......aaaahhrgghhh!". Greetings, -- Hugo 39078 From: Bhikkhu Samahita Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 2:07am Subject: Assured Illumination ... !!! Friends: Sati = Acute Awareness Well-Established, Well-Assured & Well-Founded should Awareness be! Even as the foundation of the Himalaya mountains is quite deep dug in underground and all immovable. Such imperturbable awareness makes illuminating insight arise, since whatever subject mind is directed to, pays attention to, reflects on, is conscious of, investigates or reviews, then this will appear to one as assured & ascertained, all laid open, wholly disclosed and entirely revealed. Such bright mental clarity is due to acute & undistracted awareness, which descends into the object, drills into & penetrates it completely. Even just so do the object appear as plain open, as the other world do to one possessing the divine eye... Source: The Path of Purification: Visuddhimagga. 5th century AC. http://www.pariyatti.com/book.phtml?prod_id=771100 On the 4 Foundations of Awareness: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Buddha-Direct/message/5394 Friendship is the Greatest ! Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. 39079 From: Hugo Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 0:54pm Subject: Re: Degrees of mindfulness of death and degrees of defilements (was Re: [dsg] Re: not so evil thoughts of good-hearted James. Hello Phil, On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 08:39:54 +0900, plnao wrote: > Just a theory. Please let me know of any faults you see in it. And this, > James, Howard and Hugo (I have yet to get around to the post in "Evil > thoughts" in which the value of discussion is disputed) I think that discussion can provide value to your practice as long as it is a skillful discussion, and it is in balance with the other things needed for the practice (meditation, reading/listening to Dhamma, etc). Spending all your free time reading/listening to Dhamma doesn't make it. Spending all your free time meditating doesn't make it. Spending all your free time discussing, doesn't make it. Mix all of the above together and then apply to your "free" and "non-free" time. Perhaps there is a time when you need to emphasize one or another, only you know when. >If I sat developing my own > theories about suttas, I would become fossilized > in wrong view. Agree, but I would say "I potentially would become....", because it is not for sure. > In the company of good friends, through discussion, one's > wrong views are corrected, and proper > insights that one has had can be confirmed. Now let's use your same words, just change "I" to "we" and "my" to "our": "If we sat developing our own theories about suttas, we would become fossilized in wrong view." The danger is greater when working in a group, because there is the potential to think that because many people arrived to the same conclusion, or many people chose to do X, that should be true, thus Wrong View arises. But to be consistent, add the "potentially" word to the phrase: ".....we potentially would..." Also, in a group, there is a lot of "group psychology" going on, where people tend to bond, and even if your "friend" is a little bit wrong, you tend to defend it "against" the newcomer to the group, or against other person that you don't catalog as a "friend". A lot of this is subconscious, and difficult to notice, let alone accept. It is easier to "move masses" than to "move individuals". So, what I try to do is to study on my own, discuss with others, but put it to the test on my meditation and my daily life! Greetings, -- Hugo 39080 From: gazita2002 Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 1:11pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Please help me to find sutta with: Dear Sarah, and others, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Dear Suan,Nina & Azita, ,,,,,snip,,,,, > There was one extract in the Vism or Tika which perfectly answered a > question Azita raised in Jetavana about how the bhavanga cittas come to be > disturbed by the visible object or sense object before there is any > experience of it (which didn't get an answer).....Ah, just found it: > > "Text Tiika: but how does there come to be disturbance (movement) of the > life-continuum that has a different support? Because it is connected with > it. And here the example is this: when grains of sugar are put on the > surface of a drum and one of the grains of sugar is tapped, a fly sitting > on another grain of sugar moves' (Pm. 478)." > > And without bhavanga cittas in between the sense and mind door > experiences, there could be no sense door or mind door experiences. There > have to be a continuity of cittas experiencing their objects. > ......snip..... > Metta, > > Sarah Azita: thanx for this one. I had put that one in the too-hard basket. I am finding each time I learn a little more, the deeper I see the information goes. Haven't been reading much dsg of late, so must have missed this one. Feeling a bit distracted as I have to have a surgical procedure done today, so will be off-line til next week [not that one would know if I'm around or not as I post so infrequently :-). Have been thinking of the sutta - don't remember name - where the Buddha indicates leaves and sticks lying around on the ground and makes a statement along the lines: see those sticks and leaves lying there, are you able to walk away from them and feel no attachment/remorse about leaving them behind? the listeners said yes, they could. He then asked if they could have the same detachment to their own bodies and minds. I know my answer is no in this second case scenario. Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita. > ========= 39081 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 1:17pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhikkhu Khantipalo: Practical advice for Meditators (or newcomers to Buddhism) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > Hi James > > If concentration leads to dispassion then to insight. I think our > Buddha would have been enlighted when he met the two teachers and > dont need to torture himself so much before he become enlighted > > Please read the last statement I make during my last post on this. > > > Ken O Friend Ken O, Your response is very rude. I guess I made a mistake about your intended meaning. Forget my praise for you. Metta, James 39082 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 1:29pm Subject: AZITA [dsg] Re: Please help me to find sutta with: Azita Email me off-list - even if my emails aren't getting through to you - I'm getting yours. I'm concerned about you ... I'll ring the hospital - send me the direct Ward extension number or the Clincial Nurse Consultant's name. Will be thinking of you with metta and karuna - love, Chris --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "gazita2002" wrote: > > Dear Sarah, and others, > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott > wrote: > > Dear Suan,Nina & Azita, > > ,,,,,snip,,,,, > > There was one extract in the Vism or Tika which perfectly answered a > > question Azita raised in Jetavana about how the bhavanga cittas > come to be > > disturbed by the visible object or sense object before there is any > > experience of it (which didn't get an answer).....Ah, just found it: > > > > "Text Tiika: but how does there come to be disturbance (movement) > of the > > life-continuum that has a different support? Because it is > connected with > > it. And here the example is this: when grains of sugar are put on > the > > surface of a drum and one of the grains of sugar is tapped, a fly > sitting > > on another grain of sugar moves' (Pm. 478)." > > > > And without bhavanga cittas in between the sense and mind door > > experiences, there could be no sense door or mind door experiences. > There > > have to be a continuity of cittas experiencing their objects. > > ......snip..... > > Metta, > > > > Sarah > > Azita: thanx for this one. I had put that one in the too-hard > basket. I am finding each time I learn a little more, the deeper I > see the information goes. > Haven't been reading much dsg of late, so must have missed > this one. Feeling a bit distracted as I have to have a surgical > procedure done today, so will be off-line til next week [not that one > would know if I'm around or not as I post so infrequently :-). > Have been thinking of the sutta - don't remember name - where > the Buddha indicates leaves and sticks lying around on the ground and > makes a statement along the lines: see those sticks and leaves lying > there, are you able to walk away from them and feel no > attachment/remorse about leaving them behind? the listeners said > yes, they could. > He then asked if they could have the same detachment to their > own bodies and minds. I know my answer is no in this second case > scenario. > > Patience, courage and good cheer, > Azita. > > ========= 39083 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 2:03pm Subject: Re: AZITA [dsg] Re: Please help me to find sutta with: Dear Azita,, I'm also concerned as I as I see your message and Christine's on my way out in a rush for the day. Somehow I expect everyone else to get sick and fall apart from time to time, except for you! Take care and I really hope the procedure goes well - at least you're used to hospitals! I hope you or Christine will let us know how you're doing afterwards. Think of whether you can buy a CD player when you return home so that when we send you a CD from India you can hear the recordings (Jill too) as I know you don't have a fast internet connection. And most of all, remember Courage, Patience and Good Cheer as you always remind us. Of course we all care a lot whether you're following DSG carefully or not and really hope to see your name back on the list soon. Metta, Sarah ======== --- christine_forsyth wrote: > > > Azita > > Email me off-list - even if my emails aren't getting through to you - > I'm getting yours. > I'm concerned about you ... > I'll ring the hospital - send me the direct Ward extension number or > the Clincial Nurse Consultant's name. > Will be thinking of you with metta and karuna - > love, > Chris 39084 From: kenhowardau Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 3:19pm Subject: Re: Bhikkhu Khantipalo: Practical advice for Meditators (or newcomers to Buddhism) Hi Hugo, You wrote: --------------------------- > Somewhere I read that concentration is what is needed to hold the microscope of the insight still enough in order to see Dhamma. But holding the microsocope without looking into the lens doesn't help you. > ----------------- Thanks, I like that. In a moment when the cetasika, insight (samma- ditthi) arises, there is always the supporting cetasika, right concentration (samma-samadhi). Strong insight has strong samadhi and weak insight has weak samadhi. Sometimes, there can be the right (kusala) kind of samadhi but no insight at all, and sometimes there can be samadhi that is just plain wrong (akusala). The rest of your post, I am not so sure about. I think it departs from the teaching of absolute, momentary, reality. The Buddha discovered and taught the true nature of mind: It is a transitory, conditioned phenomenon with the briefest possible duration (less than a billionth of a second). There is no 'holding it still' in the conventional sense. We poor, uninstructed worldlings find that too hard to accept, and we cling to the idea of an abiding (permanent) mind. One of the consequences of our worldling stubbornness is we think there can be no right understanding until the mind has been prepared in certain ways. We have this conventional idea of a meditator who quietens the mind, gets it fixed on a [permanent] object, and then (and only then) insight can arise. This kind of wrong understanding renders 99 percent of our daily lives infertile for insight. And what about the remaining one percent (when we are calmly attentive)? I would say that, too, is rendered infertile by wrong understanding: We still have a wrong understanding of conditionality. Kind regards, Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Hugo wrote: > On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 18:12:03 +0000 (GMT), Ken O wrote: > > > > > Scientist 2: "Why don't you try to hold it still, before you look through it?". 39085 From: gazita2002 Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 3:21pm Subject: AZITA [dsg] Re: Please help me to find sutta with: Dear Sarah, Thanks for your concern. I knew about this surgery while in India, but it did not bother me much then. Its not an emergency, and I'm only temporarily falling apart :-) cos I have to go today - usual pre-op nerves. Have written Chris off-line, Just sticks and leaves. Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Dear Azita,, > > I'm also concerned as I as I see your message and Christine's on my way > out in a rush for the day. Somehow I expect everyone else to get sick and > fall apart from time to time, except for you! > > Take care and I really hope the procedure goes well - at least you're used > to hospitals! > > I hope you or Christine will let us know how you're doing afterwards. > Think of whether you can buy a CD player when you return home so that when > we send you a CD from India you can hear the recordings (Jill too) as I > know you don't have a fast internet connection. > > And most of all, > > remember Courage, Patience and Good Cheer as you always remind us. Of > course we all care a lot whether you're following DSG carefully or not and > really hope to see your name back on the list soon. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======== > > > > --- christine_forsyth wrote: > > > > > > Azita > > > > Email me off-list - even if my emails aren't getting through to you - > > I'm getting yours. > > I'm concerned about you ... > > I'll ring the hospital - send me the direct Ward extension number or > > the Clincial Nurse Consultant's name. > > Will be thinking of you with metta and karuna - > > love, > > Chris 39086 From: Larry Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 3:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Ken & Larry - > > In a message dated 11/30/04 11:00:56 AM Eastern Standard Time, > ashkenn2k@y... writes: > > > > > Hi Larry > > > > I am not objecting. Sanna is just marking. Simple as that :). If > > sanna is ignorance, D.O will have start as Sanna and not ignorance. > > > > > > >I have to say, with some considerable trepidation, the Buddha is > > >simply wrong when he says dependent on feeling craving arises. He > > >should have said dependent on perception craving arises. More > > >generally we could say dependent on perception lobha, dosa, AND > > >moha arise. In other words, dependent on perception accumulations > > and latent tendencies condition the arising of craving. You can see > > >this for yourself in your own experience. Feeling is irrelevant. > > For the most part, the feeling that we feel is the feeling that > > accompanies the root cittas. > > > > k: Larry sometimes you amaze me :) by your own convictions. As I > > say before, let see the text what they say and not to have our own > > conclusion. Our own experience can be very unreliable, dont you > > think so :). Do you think you will crave for something that doesn't > > not feel good :). > > > > > > > > > > Ken O > > > > > ========================= > Ken, I think Larry is correct, but, of course, the Buddha is most > certainly also correct. In the D.O. scheme, vedana --> tanha is the standard > formulation. This formulation, however, is simply not as detailed as can be > obtained by filling in additional links between feeling and craving. There is another > sutta, MN 18, in which a conditionality chain including sa~n~na and based in > vedana is provided. What is said there is the following: > ------------------------------------ > Dependent on the eye and visible forms arises eye-consciousness. The coming > together of the three is contact. Due to contact there is feeling. What one > feels, one perceives. What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks > about, one proliferates about. What one proliferates about is the source from which > ideas derived from the proliferation of perceptions beset a person regarding > past, future, and present visible forms cognizable by the eye [and so on].’ > ------------------------------------ > So, what we have here is vedana --> sa~n~na --> papa~nca. If this is > put together with the D.O. linkage of vedana --> tanha, one obtains the longer > chain: vedana --> sa~n~na --> papa~nca --> tanha. > > With metta, > Howard Hi Howard and Ken, Howard, I agree with your formulation but the amazing thing is in ordinary experience feeling isn't even a consideration. I just react to accumulations when they fit into a situation sanna recognizes. It is distinctly conceptual but most of the time there isn't a lot of mental proliferation until after the basic emotional reaction consisting of lobha, dosa, or moha. Perhaps one reason the Buddha says feeling conditions craving is that bodily feeling which arises due to physiological causes does seem to condition craving. The bodily sensations of hunger, for example, can condition craving. I would still contend that sanna mediates between feeling and craving, but maybe it isn't so easy to see in this kind of situation. Consciousness produced bodily feeling (which no one here seems to recognize) is almost always produced by lobha, dosa, or moha. If we look at the lobha, dosa, or moha which produces this feeling, I think we can see that it is conditioned by accumulations and sanna. That conditioning relationship between sanna and accumulations is a conceptual one in the sense of relying on logic, in spite of the fact that concept and reason don't officially condition anything. Sanna operates with concepts. It cognizes the present situation conceptually and matches that with a past situation which is a conceptual formulation. Further emotional reaction to the present situation usually ignores the consciousness produced feeling but proliferates the emotional reaction. Ken, sanna is avijja itself. Nowhere does it say moha is not knowing. Sanna is like a naive, simple, child. When you look at a tree you see a whole tree and a permanent tree. This is sanna at work. The ignorance of dependent arising is not knowing the Four Noble Truths; this is different from doubting the 4NT, which is what moha does. Avijja is getting it wrong all together. It is not ditthi either. Ditthi is more a matter of belief, grasping, holding on to views. This doesn't particularly have anything to do with conceptual content. Sanna is direct, in this moment, and wrong because it conceptualizes, generalizes, eternalizes. If feeling conditioned craving then arahants would crave. Arahants also perceive but panna sees through sanna. Larry 39087 From: plnao Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 3:33pm Subject: AN III - 100 mental misconduct vs. thoughts of ill-will Hello all Still reflecting on the way intentional action seems to be effective with crude defilements in a way that it can't be with moderate or subtle defilements. AN III 100 has this: "In the same way, there are these gross impurities in a monk intent on heightened mind: misconduct in body, speech, & mind. These the monk -- aware & able by nature -- abandons, destroys, dispels, wipes out of existence. When he is rid of them, there remain in him the moderate impurities: thoughts of sensuality, ill will, & harmfulness. These he abandons, destroys, dispels, wipes out of existence. When he is rid of them there remain in him the fine impurities: thoughts of his caste, thoughts of his home district, thoughts related to not wanting to be despised. These he abandons, destroys, dispels, wipes out of existence" I think the distinction between "misconduct....in mind" and "thoughts of sensuality, ill will and harmfulness" is important. Misconduct in mind is what we do mentally when we know full-well how unwholesome it is. There are many moments during the day where we can see where thoughts are going. If we go along with them, and proliferate knowingly, that is "misconduct" and it can be circumvented in a way that the arising of thoughts cannot. . There are many suttas which can help us - and intentional practice in the light of those suttas can help us - become detached from "misconduct in mind"but thinking that one can prevent "thoughts of etc" from arising so readily is unwise. That is where Abhidhamma guides us in a deeper way than suttas can. The eradication of medium and subtle defilements is a project for many, many lifetimes. Well, abandoning the crude defilements is as well, but progress can be made more predictably in this lifetime, I think.. A bit puzzled by the Buddha's examples of subtle defilements above. Thoughts of caste, home district, not wanting to be despised seem fairly crude.. They are the the aspects of the eight worldly concerns that seem easiest to abandon. Concerns with pain and pleasure are the very subtle ones, I would have thought. Just more theorizing.. If you think it's way off, please help me to correct my views! Or if there is any helpful commentary on this part of the sutta, please pass along a little bit of it. Thanks in advance Metta, Phil p.s Our computer seems to be on its last legs. It's freezing more and more often, and is taking a long time to turn on. If I suddenly disappear from DSG for awhile, don't be concerned. It will be the death of our computer rather than the death of me - probably. I might choke on my cereal this morning! 39088 From: plnao Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 4:28pm Subject: Value of discussion (was evil thoughts) Hello Hugo, and all I've been enjoying your posts, Hugo. Welcome to the group. >> However, in reading your post, it appears as if you are trying to >>learn the dhamma by reading this discussion group. That is not a very good idea >> You should learn the dhamma by reading the words of > > the Buddha (the suttas) and by examining your own mind, with > > patience. > Hugo > Excellent advice James! > When we engage in discussions, there is the danger of fabricating > theories, thoughts which then we think are Dhamma but they are not. > The problem is that instead of learning Dhamma we fabricate our own > version of Dhamma which would be Wrong View, and you know what happens > next.....Wrong Action, etc. I'm not so sure about this. I think there is much more danger of fabricating theories if we read suttas on our own, and reflect on them in isolation, without discussing. The Buddha taught that the company of "admirable friends" is one of the four factors of stream-entry - in fact it's the first one that he mentions. If we discuss with good friends, they help us to see the errors of our views. Now, how do we know they are "admirable?" That's another question. The discerning mind will know, or not. There's nothing that can be done about that. It's due to accumulations. If a foolish person was fortunate enough to have the Buddha whisper in his ear, he still wouldn't have understanding. Of course we should read the theories on our own, and reflect on them before discussing. I guess that's what James meant. Otherwise he and you and anyone else who agrees with the above statement wouldn't be posting here. > My personal opinion is that if a discussion is getting too far from > the facts (whatever is considered the "facts", e.g. the suttas), or if > either part of the discussion don't "know enough", then in starts to > be "mental fabrications" and it will lead us to wrong view, wrong > action, etc. so I prefer to stop the discussion. Phil: You can also help people out. That can involve right effort. As you know, I'm sure, the Buddha approached different questions in different ways. To quote from Wings to Awakening: "the Buddha found it necessary to divide questions into four classes: those meriting a categorical answer, those meriting an analytical answer, those deserving a counter-question, and those deserving to be put aside [AN IV.43]. The first class includes questions that are already well-phrased and can yield straight answers useful in weakening one's mental effluents. The second class includes those that are poorly phrased but are close enough to becoming useful that they can be clarified by a redefinition of terms. The third class covers instances where the real issue is not the question as phrased, but the confused line of thinking or hidden agendas behind the asking of the question. Once these underlying elements are exposed and corrected by the proper counter-question, fruitful questions can then be framed. The final class of questions covers instances where both the question and the act of asking it are so misguided that any attempt to get involved in the issue would lead only to the proliferation of mental effluents, and so the whole issue should be put aside. " Phil: I think we might quickly assume that questions are in the final class and give up on them, when in fact with a bit of generous effort we would see that it is in the second or third class. And help people out with a response. I think of the way Nina tries to bring people back to what is important here and now, in the moment. So patiently, again and again. > Plus, there is the side-effect of the newcomers reading that false > Dhamma (yes, I know "false Dhamma" is an oxymoron, but I am trying to > make a point) and think that it is Dhamma. Phil: So how does sitting on the sidelines help them? Of course, as I said above, people get it, or they don't, so your intervention might seem futile at times, but it can still be right effort on your part, and helpful for your own bhavana even if it doesn't get through. All middle way, of course. Metta, Phil 39089 From: plnao Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 4:31pm Subject: typo Re: [dsg] Value of discussion (was evil thoughts) Hi Hugh, and all > Of course we should read the theories on our own, and reflect on them before > discussing. revealing typo. My mind leaps so quickly to theorize about suttas that the above might as well be left as it is! Metta, Phil 39090 From: Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 4:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Please help me to find sutta with: Agrios: "Hi Suan Lu Zaw and Larry, thank you for your help. I am quite lost when it comes to understand consequences of avija. This "body creation" is taking place after present body is dead, or rather in every moment of avija manifesting itself? It seems like it is in every moment creation resulting in obtaining body at death of the last citta. Is that the case? Does it mean there is no body apart from what we create?" Hi Agrios, Let's look at the sutta: "When a fool is obstructed by ignorance and conjoined with craving, this body thus results. Now there is both this body and external name-&-form. Here, in dependence on this duality, there is contact at the six senses. Touched by these, or one or another of them, the fool is sensitive to pleasure & pain." L: This present body is the result of kamma of ignorance and craving mostly in previous lifetimes. Dependent on this present body and external namarupa contact at the six senses arises. With contact arises feeling, pain or pleasure. As the rest of the sutta shows, how one reacts to that feeling determines whether there will be further rebirth. Every consciousness is impermanent so when a consciousness ceases we could figuratively call that a death, but I think this sutta is speaking in more general terms of what we mean by a lifetime of a kamma continuum beginning with a rebirth-linking consciousness and ending with a dieing consciousness. Even if ignorance is extinguished this body will continue until it dies according to its kamma. By "continue" I mean continuously arise and cease within one continuum governed by the kamma of ignorance and craving of previous lifetimes. Larry 39091 From: Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 5:07pm Subject: Vism.XIV,119 Vism.XIV,120 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 119. (j) Because of the words 'Mind-element having arisen and ceased, also, next to that there arises consciousness, mind, mentation ... which is appropriate mind-element' (Vbh.89),48 then resultant mind-consciousness-element without root-cause arises 'investigating' the same objective field as that received by mind-element. When next to (55) unprofitable-resultant mind-element it is (56) unprofitable-resultant, and when next to (39) profitable-resultant [mind-element] it is either (40) accompanied by joy in the case of a desirable object, or (41) accompanied by equanimity in the case of a desirable-neutral object. This is how the occurrence of three kinds of resultant consciousness should be understood as investigating. ------------------------ Note 48. See Ch. IV, note 13. [This is a long note by B. ~Nanamoli on possible sources of the cognitive series formula. Perhaps Nina will say one or two words instead.] -------------------------- 120. (k) Next to investigation, (71) functional mind-consciousness-element without root-cause arises accompanied by equanimity 'determining' that same objective field. This is how occurrence of one kind of resultant consciousness should be understood as determining. 39092 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 5:20pm Subject: [dsg] Evil thoughts (was Re: Khanti is viriya ) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "plnao" wrote: > > > Rob: No one puts it clearer than > the Burmese Abhidhamma teacher Thein Nyun in his preface to the > DhatuKathu (Pali Text Society) > xxvii writes about this: "Because the > functions of the elements give rise to the concepts of > continuity, collection and form, the ideas arise: > 1)the initial effort that has to be exerted when a > deed is about to be performed and 2) the care that has > to be taken while the deed is being performed to its > completion and this leads to the subsequent ideas > 3)"I can perform" and 4) "I can feel". Thus these four > imaginary characteristic functions of being have > bought about a deep-rooted belief in their existence. > But the elements have not the time or span of duration > to carry out such functions" . > > > Phil: So yes, there is delusion when we think "I can > perform." It is all elements. And yet, as I've been saying > lately, there is guidance in the Suttanta related to taking > action on clearly indentified blemishes etc. This is a far > shallower degree of insight than that which will arise, > or not arise, into elements. > > ================= Dear Phil, Delusion is much deeper than when we think "I can perfom". The khandhas really have fallen away, even before we know it. That is why the Dhamma is so gradual and why the Buddha even considered not to teach it. Watch out for subtle ways selfview distorts practice, that is a signpost. Robertk 39093 From: Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 1:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi, Larry (and Ken) - In a message dated 11/30/04 6:37:58 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > So, what we have here is vedana --> sa~n~na --> papa~nca. If > this is > >put together with the D.O. linkage of vedana --> tanha, one obtains > the longer > >chain: vedana --> sa~n~na --> papa~nca --> tanha. > > > >With metta, > >Howard > > Hi Howard and Ken, > > Howard, I agree with your formulation but the amazing thing is in > ordinary experience feeling isn't even a consideration. I just react > to accumulations when they fit into a situation sanna recognizes. It > is distinctly conceptual but most of the time there isn't a lot of > mental proliferation until after the basic emotional reaction > consisting of lobha, dosa, or moha. > ------------------------------------------ Howard: Larry, I suspect there really is a good deal of mental proliferation, but it is subtle, not "highlighted" in our experience, not "registering" at the highest level of awareness. I suspect that should we cultivate stronger clarity in our experience, and strengthened powers of attention (by means of sustained mindfulness), and greater background calm, this mental concocting will become more evident. I think there are subtle levels of concocting and grosser levels, with the grosser levels being more evident. --------------------------------------------- > > Perhaps one reason the Buddha says feeling conditions craving is that > bodily feeling which arises due to physiological causes does seem to > condition craving. The bodily sensations of hunger, for example, can > condition craving. I would still contend that sanna mediates between > feeling and craving, but maybe it isn't so easy to see in this kind > of situation. > -------------------------------------- Howard: I think it is actually the feeling itself that is directly craved. Contact with an object yields feeling. When that feeling is pleasantness, we want it, but since recognition (sa~n~na) intervenes, we *think* it is the contacted object that we want. This is most especially so in the case of mind-door contact with projected pa~n~nati as object. (Likewise for feeling that is not pleasant, where the craving is for its absence.) This teaching of the Buddha's that is expressible by phassa --> vedana --> sa~n~na --> papa~nca --> tanha is, IMO, an amazing, powerful insight into the operation of mind. It is brilliant! ---------------------------------------------- Consciousness produced bodily feeling (which no one > > here seems to recognize) is almost always produced by lobha, dosa, or > moha. If we look at the lobha, dosa, or moha which produces this > feeling, I think we can see that it is conditioned by accumulations > and sanna. That conditioning relationship between sanna and > accumulations is a conceptual one in the sense of relying on logic, > in spite of the fact that concept and reason don't officially > condition anything. Sanna operates with concepts. > ---------------------------------------- Howard: Well, "higher order" sa~n~na operates with concepts, or, perhaps better said, it operates with thoughts. (Concepts per se aren't really objects. They are imagined objects.) But the sa~n~na conditioned by a physical sense door doesn't work with thoughts; it serves as a *starting point* for a thought process that is conceptual proliferation. -------------------------------------- It cognizes the > > present situation conceptually and matches that with a past situation > which is a conceptual formulation. > ------------------------------------- Howard: Mmm. I think the operation is a bit too elementary/primitive to say it cognizes conceptually. I agree it compares the current object with a mark set by a prior sa~n~na operation, but this is more of a proto-conceptualizing, I think, than a full blown conceptualizing when applying to physical sense-door objects. -------------------------------------- Further emotional reaction to the > > present situation usually ignores the consciousness produced feeling > but proliferates the emotional reaction. > > Ken, sanna is avijja itself. Nowhere does it say moha is not knowing. > Sanna is like a naive, simple, child. When you look at a tree you see > a whole tree and a permanent tree. This is sanna at work. > ----------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, it is a higher level sa~n~na. But it isn't quite right to say that sa~n~na is avijja itself. It is *infected* by avijja. In fact, I see *all* the links of D.O. as infected by avijja. (So, for example, feeling isn't just pleasantness or unpleasantness or neutrality. It is "I like" or "I dislike" or "I am neutral about".) ----------------------------------------- The > > ignorance of dependent arising is not knowing the Four Noble Truths; > this is different from doubting the 4NT, which is what moha does. > Avijja is getting it wrong all together. It is not ditthi either. > Ditthi is more a matter of belief, grasping, holding on to views. > This doesn't particularly have anything to do with conceptual > content. Sanna is direct, in this moment, and wrong because it > conceptualizes, generalizes, eternalizes. > > If feeling conditioned craving then arahants would crave. Arahants > also perceive but panna sees through sanna. ------------------------------------------- Howard: This is much the point I made in all my "strange" writings about D.O. In an arahant, the unraveling phase of D.O. has occured, and the ignorance-conditioned links are all done and gone. An arahant recognizes, but recognizes correctly, with no distortion. That is no longer the same sa~n~na. ----------------------------------------- > > Larry > > ====================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39094 From: kenhowardau Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 8:15pm Subject: Re: AN III - 100 mental misconduct vs. thoughts of ill-will Hi Phil, ------------------ Ph: > Still reflecting on the way intentional action seems to be effective with crude defilements in a way that it can't be with moderate or subtle defilements. ------------------- Perish the thought! If there were intentional actions (a polite name for 'rite and ritual') that dealt with crude defilements, the Buddha would have delivered an entirely different Dhamma. It would have listed steps just like we see in the instruction manual to a kit- form set of shelves (or whatever). Instead, he described all the different states of consciousness so that we could eventually verify his descriptions for ourselves. I suspect you may have missed the point of the sutta you have quoted. Consequently, you have interpreted 'crude defilements' in the conventional way. But I think the sutta is referring to 'doubt' 'wrong view' and 'belief in the efficacy of rite and ritual.' They are 'abandoned, destroyed, dispelled, wiped out of existence' by Path factors at the stage of Stream-entry. -------------------------- Ph: > AN III 100 has this: "In the same way, there are these gross impurities in a monk intent on heightened mind: misconduct in body, speech, & mind. These the monk -- aware & able by nature -- abandons, destroys, dispels, wipes out of existence. > -------------------------- The sutta then describes the defilements lying latent in the consciousness of a Stream-enterer and a Once-returner: ------------------------- > When he is rid of them, there remain in him the moderate impurities:thoughts of sensuality, ill will, & harmfulness. > -------------------------- Then it describes the Path-consciousness of an Non-returner with respect to its eradication of the moderate impurities: ----------------- > These he abandons,destroys, dispels, wipes out of existence. When he is rid of them there remain in him the fine impurities: thoughts of his caste, thoughts of his home district, thoughts related to not wanting to be despised. > ----------------- And the Path Consciousness at the stage of Arahanthood: -------------------- > These he abandons, destroys, dispels, wipes out of existence" > Ph: > There are many suttas which can help us - and intentional practice in the light of those suttas can help us - become detached from "misconduct in mind" but thinking that one can prevent "thoughts of etc" from arising so readily is unwise. That is where Abhidhamma guides us in a deeper way than suttas can. > --------------------- I am sure the Suttanta method and the Abhidhamma method are one and the same, and there is no rite or ritual that detaches us from anything. It is a pity that nearly all of us begin our Dhamma studies at the deep end (Suttanta) and only later, if at all, do we venture into the shallow end (Abhidhamma). Actually, I don't think the Dhamma has a shallow end, but you know what I mean: one end is over our heads, and the other end is hopelessly over our heads. :-) ---------------- Ph: >A bit puzzled by the Buddha's examples of subtle defilements above. Thoughts of caste, home district, not wanting to be despised seem fairly crude.. They are the the aspects of the eight worldly concerns that seem easiest to abandon. Concerns with pain and pleasure are the very subtle ones, I would have thought. ---------------- As I said, I suspect you had not interpreted this sutta as describing the defilement-eradicating functions of the Path-factors. Otherwise, you would have realised the above were the seemingly harmless conceits of an Anagami. Easy mistake! --------------------- <. . .> p.s Our computer seems to be on its last legs. It's freezing more and more often, and is taking a long time to turn on. --------------------- Bad luck. Has it been defragmented lately? Ken H 39095 From: Antony Woods Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 9:09pm Subject: Re: Metta for oneself translation question Dear Sarah, Thanks for the comprehensive replies. It seems likely that the English translation of Mahasi Sayadaw’s translation is wrong. You quoted the same Pali words with the conventional translation. The word “deserve” does not fit with Mahasi’s introduction to and with the rest of the translation. I wouldn’t equate metta for oneself with covetousness. I thought that if, using the pun, you “mind your own mind’s business” (Nyanaponika) then this is metta for oneself without covetousness. Although greed means more than wanting the possessions of others. Dr Elizabeth Ashby wrote: “The commentators of old were much more drastic. Greed is "delight in one's own possessions."” http://www.buddhanet.net/filelib/genbud/bodhi014.zip Nyanaponika did write: “Love, without speaking and thinking of "I", knowing well that this so-called "I" is a mere delusion.” http://www.buddhanet.net/ss03.htm == S: If one thinks one should develop metta to oneself, one will just develop more and more attachment and it will bring more and more problems. A: The word “should” seems important here. Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote: “This might appear to contradict what we said earlier, that metta is free from self-reference. The contradiction is only apparent, however, for in developing metta towards oneself one regards oneself objectively, as a third person. Further, the kind of love developed is not self-cherishing but a detached altruistic wish for one's own well-being.” http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/waytoend.html#n19 A friend wrote to me to wish all beings be happy, not all beings except Antony Woods. What did Munindra say about metta for oneself? I never met him but I have confidence in him. May you be well and happy, Antony. 39096 From: plnao Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 10:16pm Subject: Re: Degrees of mindfulness of death and degrees of defilements (was Re: [dsg] Re: not so evil thoughts of good-hearted James. Hi Hugo Our paths crossed here. I replied to that earlier post of yours before seeing this one. Sorry about that. > I think that discussion can provide value to your practice as long as > it is a skillful discussion, and it is in balance with the other > things needed for the practice (meditation, reading/listening to > Dhamma, etc). Right. Finding that balance is what the middle way is all about. I do think that I could benefit from sitting on my theories for a couple of days before sharing them with the group, but don't. I think it might be beneficial if one developed the habit of discussing every other day, of having silent days between. For example. > Spending all your free time reading/listening to Dhamma doesn't make it. > Spending all your free time meditating doesn't make it. > Spending all your free time discussing, doesn't make it. > > Mix all of the above together and then apply to your "free" and "non-free" time. > > Perhaps there is a time when you need to emphasize one or another, > only you know when. Yes, well said. > >If I sat developing my own > > theories about suttas, I would become fossilized > > in wrong view. > > Agree, but I would say "I potentially would become....", because it is > not for sure. Yes, again well said. I would say "probably." > > In the company of good friends, through discussion, one's > > wrong views are corrected, and proper > > insights that one has had can be confirmed. > > Now let's use your same words, just change "I" to "we" and "my" to "our": > > "If we sat developing our own theories about suttas, we would become > fossilized in wrong view." > > The danger is greater when working in a group, because there is the > potential to think that because many people arrived to the same > conclusion, or many people chose to do X, that should be true, thus > Wrong View arises. Well, fortunately at DSG there is always disagreement. I used to deplore the participation of people who didn't share the group's founding principles (appreciation of Abhidhamma being one of them) and refer to them as doing "dojo yaburi." (When students of one martial arts teacher burst into the practice play of another to show off their superiority.) Now I see how helpful the courteous clash of views can be! > But to be consistent, add the "potentially" word to the phrase: > ".....we potentially would..." > > Also, in a group, there is a lot of "group psychology" going on, where > people tend to bond, and even if your "friend" is a little bit wrong, > you tend to defend it "against" the newcomer to the group, or against > other person that you don't catalog as a "friend". A lot of this is > subconscious, and difficult to notice, let alone accept. Again, very well said. When I first came here and someone was disrespectful of my friend Nina, I flipped out and had a go at him. I don't think that would happen anymore, but who's to say for sure? But you make a very important point. I think it's something we outgrow pretty quickly though. > It is easier to "move masses" than to "move individuals". I like that! I'm sure I will use that someday when writing about Japan. Thanks. > So, what I try to do is to study on my own, discuss with others, but > put it to the test on my meditation and my daily life! Hear Hear. Daily life is where it really happens for me. Metta, Phil 39097 From: plnao Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 10:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (was Re: Khanti is viriya ) Hi Rob > Delusion is much deeper than when we think "I can perfom". The > khandhas really have fallen away, even before we know it. That is > why the Dhamma is so gradual and why the Buddha even considered not > to teach it. > Watch out for subtle ways selfview distorts practice, that is a > signpost. > Robertk Thank you always for these reminders. I am heading into a period when I suspect I will be addicted to suttas and will be at risk of not studying Abhidhamma enough. (When there is an hour available for Dhamma study, and I have an anthology of suttas in one hand, and CMA in the other, I wonder how often I will choose CMA!? :) Of course studying suttas needn't lead to self-view, but it seems to me that it is more likely to do it than studying Abhidhamma is. Not much to feed self-view in Abhidhamma, expect possibly for conceit related to "getting" it. So many mental moments have fallen away during the minute or so during which I wrote this. And this. And this. But then there are the accumulations, the asevayas (sp?) They don't *seem* to fall away, they seem more constant. I want to know more about them. They come up in Lodewijk's speech, which I will be looking at tomorrow. Metta, Phil 39098 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 10:57pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 64 - Perception/Sa~n~naa (k) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.3 Perception(sa~n~naa)contd] ***** Saññå arises with all cittas of the four jåtis. Saññå is of the same jåti as the citta it accompanies and thus saññå can be akusala, kusala, vipåka or kiriya. Saññå can be classified according to the six kinds of objects which are experienced through the six doors and this reminds us that saññå is different all the time. We read in the Gradual Sayings (Book of the Sixes, Chapter VI, §9, A Penetrative Discourse): -“Monks, perceptions are six: perceptions of visible objects, sounds, -smells, tastes, touches and ideas.” The perception of visible object is not the perception of sound and it is not the perception of a concept. When we for example talk to someone else there is saññå which perceives sound, there is saññå which perceives visible object, there is saññå which perceives tangible object, there is saññå which perceives a concept. All these saññås are completely different from one another and they arise at different moments. Objects appear one at a time through the different doorways and different saññås mark and remember these objects. When we understand this it will help us to see that our life actually is one moment of citta which experiences one object through one of the six doors. The ultimate truth is different from conventional truth, namely, the world of people and things which seem to last. ***** [Ch.3 Perception(sa~n~naa)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 39099 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 0:50am Subject: Band-aids, Control and Puppy dog Tails…..(without much Pali for Joop!) Dear Phil, (Joop & RobM), I’d like to add a little more to all the other fine posts on these topics. I always follow your threads with interest too. Please keep up the Park walk series. We always smile a lot whilst reading them, even if they are about evil thoughts;-). This morning we went for an early morning walk along Puppy Dog Trail (aka Snake Path) and came across quite a few yappy dogs, but not yet in their winter coats in Hong Kong yet. We have new fines for trainers who don’t clear up or 'take control' and somehow even the yaps seem less yappy these days. So I’m all for training the trainers and the pups and for all kinds of band-aids too. Whenever a student visits me squealing about a cut or a bruise or even a headache, I reach for the band-aid packet and administer it with a little TLC and it seems to do magic;-) End of squeals for the class. Some arrive these days with their own fluorescent coloured varieties of band-aids and other remedies already administered by school nurses, mothers or maids. We all have our preferences and special methods for dealing with all those daily troubles that come our way. Is there anything wrong in using band-aids, in training pups, in turning off the War saga, avoiding eye contact with beggars in India (as Christine was taught) or sealing one’s lips(or even those of a few teenage boys as I confess to having done at times!!)? No!! Is there one band-aid that suits all, of course not either. We all have our own styles, preferences, methods or techniques for managing our lives and indeed we often swap band-aids or recipes too. If we think that we mustn’t apply a band-aid or follow a recipe, it would be indicative of a kind of wrong view of anatta meaning let pups or teenagers or loud mouths run wild. Anatta and no control simply means that whether or not we apply the band-aid, which colour gets to be applied and whether it will have any desired effect or not will depend on many, many factors. Every thought, intention, effort, act, speech, movement, like or dislike, as well as every other mental and physical element, is dependent on numerous conditions. The self, which only appears in our fantasies, never has existed and never will exist to exert any say in the matter at all. This is the illusion that only a Buddha could discover and teach us. So apply as many band-aids as you like (or rather, as conditions allow) and develop awareness of the realities appearing at these times too, so that gradually understanding can grow which knows the difference between when there is and is not any awareness, regardless of whether it’s a pink florescent or a a spotty green band-aid (or no band-aid at all!) that is being applied at the time. Gradually, by developing more understanding, the world of realities will be clearly distinguished from the world of concepts and there won’t be any question about what actions should or should not be followed, who is applying the remedies, whether band-aids have anything to do with the Path or whether pups can really be trained. You made many of these points beautifully in your tranquilizer comments to Bhante V. The Middle Way is following the Path regardless of the tranquilizers used along the way. Phil, I liked a comment Nina made recently on another thread: “Through the development of right understanding we notice more and more how deeply rooted clinging to self is, no matter what we do. We see ourselves as sitting, we cling to the posturs! I want to be good, I again. I study, I again, I write, I again. And so on.” I also have a textual quote I’ve been saving for you with more on the abandoning of ill-will which I’ll type out below, to be understood in the light of anatta and the development of satipatthana, of course!! I quoted briefly from it in a post to Mike recently. I’ll add more here as it includes the hot poker you’ve mentioned so appropriately. Metta and best wishes for the development of satipatthana and all things nice. Sarah From Sammohavinodani (Dispeller), Classification of the Foundations of Mindfulness, 1257f *** “Furthermore, six things lead to the abandoning of ill-will: 1) the acquiring of the sign of amity, 2) devotion to the development of amity, 3) reviewing ownership of kamma, 4) much reflection, 5) good friendship, 6) suitable talk. * 1) For ill-will is abandoned in one who acquires amity in any of the forms of specific or general directional pervasion. 2) and also in one who develops amity by limited and unlimited directional pervasion; 3) also in one who reviews the ownership of his own or others’ kamma thus: ‘And if you are angry with him, what will you do? Can you destroy his virtuous conduct, etc? Have you not come by reason of your own kamma, and will you not go, too, by reason of your own kamma? Becoming angry with another is like wanting to strike another by picking up red-hot coals, a hot poker, excrement and so on. And if he is angry with you, what will he do? Can he destroy your virtuous conduct, etc? He has come by reason of his own kamma and will go, too, by reason of his own kamma. Like an unaccepted present, like a handful of dust thrown against the wind, this anger of his will fall back on his own head only;’ 4) also in one who remains in reflection after reviewing the ownership of kamma. 5) Ill-will is abandoned also in one who cultivates good friends who delight in the development of amity like the Elder Assagutta. 6) Also it is abandoned through suitable talk while standing, sitting, etc, which is based on amity. * Hence it was said [above]: “Six things lead to the abandoning of ill-will: the acquiring of the sign of amity, devotion to the development of amity, reviewing the ownership of kamma, much reflection, good friendship, suitable talk”. But he understands that it is through the Never-Returner path that there comes to be the future non-arising of the ill-will abandoned by means of these six things.” ====================================================== 39100 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 1:26am Subject: Azita news Hello Sarah, all, Just a note to say that I have spoken to Azita. All has gone well, she will be home again on the weekend if not sooner, and her sister will be staying with her and taking good care of her. She promises to take it easy, and obey orders. Hmmmm ... too agreeable, too submissive - might warn her sister. :-) We then settled down to talk Dhamma for nearly an hour. I'll keep you informed. metta and peace, Christine (who feels considerably better now) ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 39101 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 2:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Azita news Hi Chris, Thanks so much for this good news! I was concerned but was also reflecting on detachment and how it is only visible object that's seen, but sanna vipallasa definitely plays its role (Ken O!), attending to the details and assisting the citta and other akusala mental factors to mark and attend to all the following concepts with so precious little equanimity in my case, whenever a friend is involved. I came across Azita's welcome to Naresh, encouraging the importance of right understanding in the first place. Short and very sweet. I'm glad you had a good dhamma talk too. By far the best medicine, whether the sweet or bitter kind. Hopefully she'll be back posting with good cheer in no time. Meanwhile another friend is plotting to make sure she will have no problem listening to the India c.d, so we'll see... Metta and thanks again. Sarah p.s If I forget to say it later, I wish all the Cooranites a good weekend get together with lots of useful discussion. If you or anyone else has the right equipment to download, you may even be able to listen to a part of the India discussions by then too.... ========================================== --- christine_forsyth wrote: > > > Hello Sarah, all, > > Just a note to say that I have spoken to Azita. All has gone well, 39102 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 2:28am Subject: Death Dear Group, I am reading a book called "Who Dies?" by Stephen and Ondrea Levine - an investigation of Conscious Living and Conscious Dying. The first page tells how, each and every year, 70 million people die from all causes - Imagine that! 70,000,000 men women and children! This statistic brought about the reflection 'If this happens to all of those people, what is there to prevent it happening to me at anytime?' There is no prevention, no way to deflect approaching death - nothing that will protect any one of us - surely something to think about ... ["I am of the nature to die, I have not gone beyond death" is to be recollected daily.] metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 39103 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 3:00am Subject: Re: Death Dear Christine, It is better to contemplate death at each action. 'Daily' is still vague. I am sitting. I may die before standing. I am typing. I may die before I finish. My arms are bended. I may die before they are stretched out. If you practise from action to action, this sort of meditation will finally lead you to a sort of calmness. This does help anyone who practise death contemplation. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > > Dear Group, > > I am reading a book called "Who Dies?" by Stephen and Ondrea Levine - > an investigation of Conscious Living and Conscious Dying. > The first page tells how, each and every year, 70 million people die > from all causes - Imagine that! 70,000,000 men women and children! > This statistic brought about the reflection 'If this happens to all > of those people, what is there to prevent it happening to me at > anytime?' > There is no prevention, no way to deflect approaching death - > nothing that will protect any one of us - surely something to think > about ... > > ["I am of the nature to die, I have not gone beyond death" is to be > recollected daily.] > > metta and peace, > Christine > ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 39104 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 3:20am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 145 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, 40 lokuttara cittas and 27 mahaggata(jhana) cittas have been discussed down to molecular level. Among 54 kamavacara cittas, 8 mahauksala cittas have been discussed. In the previous post 2 cittas that is the first pair of 8 mahavipaka cittas were discussed. The second pair is nana vippayutta cittas. This means in these two cittas, there is no pannindriya cetasika. Their full names are 1. somanassa saha gatam nana vippayuttam asankharika citta 2. somanassa saha gatam nana vippayuttam sasankharika citta The first pair is accompanied by 33 cetasikas that is 7 universal cetasikas, 6 particular cetasikas, 19 universal sobhana cetasikas and 1 pannindriya cetasika altogether 7 + 6 + 19 + 1 = 33 cetasikas. In this 2nd pair, pannindriya cetasika does not arise and so there arise 32 cetasikas. So in these 2 molecules of dhamma, one atom which is citta links with other 32 cetasika atoms with paccaya bonds. The third pair of 8 mahavipaka cittas is 1. upekkha saha gatam nana sampayuttam asankharika citta 2. upekkha saha gatam nana sampayuttam sasankharika citta. From 32 cetasikas of 2nd pair, piti does not arise. So there will be 31 cetasikas. But as pannindriya arises in both cittas, 1 is added and there will be a total of 32 cetasikas in each of 3rd pair. The fourth pair of 8 mahavipaka cittas is 1. upekkha saha gatam nana vippayuttam asankharika citta 2. upekkha saha gatam nana vippayuttam sasankharika citta. There is no panna arises in both of 4th pair of cittas. So there arise 31 cetasikas. In 8 mahavipaka cittas, the possible cetasikas that can accompany are 33 in the 1st pair, 32 in the 2nd pair, 32 in the 3rd pair and 31 in the 4th pair of 8 mahavipaka cittas. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39105 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 3:33am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 146 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, In 8 mahavipaka cittas, 3 virati cetasikas do not arise. Because as they are resultant consciousness they do not need to specifically avoid kayaducarita or vaciducarita or dujiva and equally they do not need to do so as they do not require avoid. Karuna and mudita are not of the cetasikas of 8 mahavipaka cittas. These 8 cittas are resultant consciousness and they do not perform any javana function. These 8 cittas are patisandhi cittas or bhavanga cittas or cuti cittas or tadarammana cittas. In all these 4 functions of citta, karuna and mudita do not arise and they do not need to arise. So among 25 sobhana cetasikas, 3 virati and 2 appamanna are excluded in 8 mahavipaka cittas. So there will be 7 universal cetasikas, 6 pakinnaka cetasikas, and 20 sobhana cetasikas altogether 33 maximal possible cetasikas in 8 mahavipaka cittas. Each of these 8 mahavipaka cittas are the result of each of 8 mahakusala cittas in the past. So they seem to be similar but functionwise they are totally different. While 8 mahakusala cittas are performing their javana functions, 8 mahavipaka cittas perform their functions of patisandhi kicca (function), bhavanga kicca, cuti kicca, and tadarammana kicca. While 8 mahakusala cittas arise they at the time of arising have already produced kamma for later results. But when 8 mahavipaka cittas arise they do not produce or create any kamma at all because they are just the result of previous action which were 8 mahakusala cittas. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39106 From: Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 10:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Azita news Hi, Christine - In a message dated 12/1/04 4:27:44 AM Eastern Standard Time, cforsyth1@b... writes: > Hello Sarah, all, > > Just a note to say that I have spoken to Azita. All has gone well, > she will be home again on the weekend if not sooner, and her sister > will be staying with her and taking good care of her. She promises > to take it easy, and obey orders. Hmmmm ... too agreeable, too > submissive - might warn her sister. :-) We then settled down to > talk Dhamma for nearly an hour. I'll keep you informed. > > metta and peace, > Christine (who feels considerably better now) > ======================= Christine, thank you for the kindness of reporting this good news. Azita, my best to you. Heal quickly and well. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39107 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 3:48am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 147 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, Among 24 kama sobhana cittas or beautiful sensuous consciousness, we have discussed on 8 mahakusala cittas and 8 mahavipaka cittas down to the molecular level. Each of 121 cittas and each of 52 cetasikas have been discussed in the previous posts. Currently we are discussing which cetasikas arise with each citta. 40 lokuttara cittas, 27 jhana cittas, 8 mahakusala cittas and 8 mahavipaka cittas have been discussed in the previous posts. Citta is an atom of dhamma and cetasikas are other atoms of dhamma. When they are combined in the manner of sampayutta ( inseparably mixed ), they become molecules of Dhamma. In 8 mahakiriya cittas which are kamavacara sahetuka cittas, there do not arise 3 virati cetasikas namely samma-kammanta, samma-vaca, and samma-ajiva. Sahetuka means 'with hetu or root'. Root dhamma in these mahakiriya cittas are alobha, adosa and amoha. As there is ahetuka kiriya citta which is hasituppada citta, these 8 kama cittas are called sahetuka cittas. Arahats all have done their job at arahatta magga kala. Kala means 'time' or 'specific time'. At magga kala, all 8 parts of NEP Noble Eightfold Path arise. When 3 virati cannot arise together in kamavacara mahakusala cittas, they do arise together at magga kala and phala kala. Since arahats have done their job of eradicating all defilements, they do not need to eradicate anything further more. So when kamavacara citta arises in them, there do not arise 3 virati cetasikas. In 8 mahakiriya cittas, there arise 7 universal cetasikas, 6 pakinnaka cetasikas, 19 universal sobhana cetasikas and 2 appamanna cetasikas and 1 pannindriya cetasika altogether 7 + 6 + 19 + 2 + 1 = 35 cetasikas. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39108 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 4:06am Subject: Re: Death A very good book Christine, I think I even mentioned it on dsg before. He is extremely compassionate and understanding about death. It was one of the books that helped me understand how to develop maranasati. Robertk In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > > Dear Group, > > I am reading a book called "Who Dies?" by Stephen and Ondrea Levine - > an investigation of Conscious Living and Conscious Dying. > The first page tells how, each and every year, 70 million people die > from all causes - time--- 39109 From: jwromeijn Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 5:14am Subject: [dsg] Re: What means 'no control' ? And band-aids Dear Nina, Sarah, KenO and all J:> but why this dispositions not fall away: not in a > split second, not in some years and not in aeons? Nina: This is frightening, isn't it? They are dormant in each citta, they do not arise with the akusala citta, and thus we cannot say they fall away. They condition the arising of akusala citta. … by developing understanding of the eightfold Path, these latent tendencies wear away. Joop No, it's not frightening. I know I had to do work on the roots of desire, hate and delusion, and developing understanding, in insight meditation and in daily life, is good for that work. Still in my (primitive) intuition it is a kind of atta-belief, to think that 'things' like dispositions are more or less permanent. ========================================== J: >my main question still is: it still also the case for animals ? Nina: Ken O explained, animals do not have the capacity to develop understanding. Take the Bodhisatta's horse Kanthaka who was so sad to have to return to the palace. But he was reborn a deva, and he could then listen to the Dhamma. …I also feel a lot for animals. Joop: I thought KenO said animals have only a little capacity to develop understanding. So somewhere hundred thousands years ago that capacity (that faculty) started. What to say on the story of that horse ? I like fairy tales but I don't really think Kanthaka could (as a deva) listen to the Dhamma: does a deva have ears and who's talking, or does the Dhamma exist there in printed form? Useless questions of course but still that's why I can take such stories serious. I don't feel a lot for animals: I think I am (partly) an animal because I think the evolutionary theory (Darwinism) is a rather good theory. I realize Jataka-stories and theories like Darwinism all belong to the conceptual reality, and not to the ultimate one. And (to me) the concepts are as such not important, we only need concepts to talk about the ultimate reality. In the time the Buddha lived, and in his culture, fairy tales were the form of that talking. They have a soteriological function, it's not important that they (as hisorical facts) never happened. And I think in our time we need other stories, that's why the relation between buddhism and evolutionary theory does interests me, and other theories from the natural science too. If the dsg is not the place to discuss about them, then I can better leave. ========================================== Sarah: Anatta and no control simply means that whether or not we apply the band-aid, which colour gets to be applied and whether it will have any desired effect or not will depend on many, many factors. Joop: I think the 'band-aid' is a usefull metaphore, I think I have some, belonging to my culture and my (temporary) identity; natural science as a way of understanding the conceptual reality is one of them. Metta Joop 39110 From: plnao Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 5:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: AN III - 100 mental misconduct vs. thoughts of ill-will Hi Ken Thanks for the feedback > ------------------ > Ph: > Still reflecting on the way intentional action seems to be > effective with crude defilements in a way that it can't be with > moderate or subtle defilements. > ------------------- > > Perish the thought! If there were intentional actions (a polite name > for 'rite and ritual') that dealt with crude defilements, the Buddha > would have delivered an entirely different Dhamma. It would have > listed steps just like we see in the instruction manual to a kit- > form set of shelves (or whatever). Instead, he described all the > different states of consciousness so that we could eventually verify > his descriptions for ourselves. Needless to say, like all beginners, I see the exhortative, prescriptive sounding language used in the suttas (in translation, at the very least, and presumedly in the original as well) and take it as written. You're right though, it is so much better to see them as descriptive. So, when we read, for example, that one removes an unwholesome thought and replaces it with a wholesome one the way a carpenter replaces a rotten peg with a solid one, it is a description of what happens when panna rules rather than a prescription of what someone should do. For example, we talk of guarding sense doors, and it's easy to think of this as a prescribed practice, but whenever there is kusala citta, the sense doors *are* guarded, because there can only be congnition through one sense door at a time. > I suspect you may have missed the point of the sutta you have > quoted. Consequently, you have interpreted 'crude defilements' in > the conventional way. But I think the sutta is referring > to 'doubt' 'wrong view' and 'belief in the efficacy of rite and > ritual.' They are 'abandoned, destroyed, dispelled, wiped out of > existence' by Path factors at the stage of Stream-entry. Yes, I was caught by that "mental misconduct." Does that mean tthe doubt, wrong view, belief in efficacy of rites and rituals that are wiped out at stream-entry? You say you "think" this is the case. Is that confirmed in the Bhikkhu Bodhi commentary? It certainly sounds right, what you're saying, those references to defilements being abandoned at stages of insight. Nina taught me something about this during the summer, when I was posting passages from Deeds of Merit. Time to re-read those. It takes me such many repeated readings to retain things. I was reading meaning into the sutta in a way that supported what I was going through. Of course, as I've said in other posts recently, I suspected that was what I was up to, so am aware of the danger of reading suttas on my own without commentary. I will have that soon when the MN with commentary of BB arrives. On the other hand, another opportunity to be grateful to the Buddha, who supplies so much help for people with all levels of insight. Those suttas that I list in the original "evil thoughts" post, even when misinterpreted (I'm not sure they all were) led me to eliminate a very unwholesome habit, even while they didn't get at the root problem. (A very helpful band-aid, at least. Thanks for the post, Sarah. I haven't read it yet, but will tomorrow, and will probably get back to you in a few days.) (snip) > and there is no rite or ritual that detaches us from > anything. That's right. Thanks for the reminder. It is a pity that nearly all of us begin our Dhamma > studies at the deep end (Suttanta) and only later, if at all, do we > venture into the shallow end (Abhidhamma). Very interesting. I always assume Abhidhamma is the deep end, but maybe you're right. Suttanta is like the deep end because it is so very easy for us to drown in it and get lost in the conventional language. I can see the risk of that. And it's like the deep end because we have to get beneath the surface of the conventional language, getting deep between what appears at times to be quite shallow. But how can we? I look forward to reading Bhikkhu Bodhi's introdutcion to the MN anthology. I would like to know more about why the Buddha chose to use such active, exhortative language. It can't all be the fault of the translators. As Rob K said in another post, the Buddha almost gave up on teaching the Dhamma, because he knew that people wouldn't accept its subtlety, that they wouldn't be patient with its being so gradual. So why did he use such exhortative language? Why did he use the active voice instead of the passive voice more often? Why did he use turns of phrase that could only serve to hasten the misinterpretations that he saw coming? I really do appreciate your help here, Ken. But of course I will still be thinking about this sort of thing. I can't yet shed a suspicion there the reason the Buddha seems to be prescribing action is that he *did* prescribe action to people at low degrees of insight even as he offered subtler courses of non-action for people with more developed levels of insight. That the same sutta can be read as both prescriptive and descriptive, depending on the level of insight of the person involved. This is just a beginner's hunch and doesn't merit further discussion. But it really doesn't matter, all this speculation on my part. What matters is what's happening right at this moment through the six doors. When there is seeing, or hearing, there is no Phil with his interminable mini-dramas! Metta, Phil 39111 From: agriosinski Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 6:13am Subject: [dsg] Re: Please help me to find sutta with: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: [...] > Every consciousness is impermanent so when a consciousness ceases we > could figuratively call that a death, but I think this sutta is speaking > in more general terms of what we mean by a lifetime of a kamma continuum > beginning with a rebirth-linking consciousness and ending with a dieing > consciousness. Even if ignorance is extinguished this body will continue > until it dies according to its kamma. By "continue" I mean continuously > arise and cease within one continuum governed by the kamma of ignorance > and craving of previous lifetimes. > > Larry Thank you Larry, I am not used to think about past cetana/kamma -> vipaka. Something good to practice :) metta, Agrios. 39113 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 6:36am Subject: Re: test --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > test. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Nina, Do not worry. Your new address is working. I am looking forward to reading your posts with new address. With Metta, Htoo Naing 39114 From: Hugo Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 7:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhu Khantipalo: Practical advice for Meditators (or newcomers to Buddhism) Hello Ken, On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 23:19:54 -0000, kenhowardau wrote: > Thanks, I like that. In a moment when the cetasika, insight (samma- > ditthi) arises, there is always the supporting cetasika, right > concentration (samma-samadhi). Strong insight has strong samadhi and > weak insight has weak samadhi. Sometimes, there can be the right > (kusala) kind of samadhi but no insight at all, and sometimes there > can be samadhi that is just plain wrong (akusala). > > The rest of your post, I am not so sure about. I think it departs > from the teaching of absolute, momentary, reality. The Buddha > discovered and taught the true nature of mind: It is a transitory, > conditioned phenomenon with the briefest possible duration (less > than a billionth of a second). >There is no 'holding it still' in the conventional sense. I agree, but in the same way I use the word "I", and you use the word "your" and the word "I", I think it is useful to use the "holding still" phrase in order to convey a message. In other words, that would be a skillful usage of the concept of self. This of course as long as you realize that there is no self, but it is only a "tool" to help you understand. We could go back to the microscope analogy, the scientists can say, "hey let's make this sample (water, or whatever) still so we can look it via the microscope, once they look through the lens, they will see that it is NOT still, there are a lot of little creatures (amoebas, bacteria, etc.) moving around, then they will grab one of them and make it "still", then use a more powerful microscope to watch it, they will discover that it is NOT still, there are things inside it moving too, and so on, all the way to molecules and atoms. >One of the > consequences of our worldling stubbornness is we think there can be > no right understanding until the mind has been prepared in certain > ways. Do you mean that right understanding can just POP UP without me doing ANYTHING? That would be imposible, just the fact that we are reading/listening/discussing Dhamma, we are "preparing" the mind to understand things that we didn't know before. Then, if we live a moral life, and meditate (any method), we are also "preparing" the mind. So, I think that there cannot be right understanding unless we "prepare" the mind to acquire it. >We have this conventional idea of a meditator who quietens the > mind, gets it fixed on a [permanent] object, and then (and only > then) insight can arise. I wouldn't say "then and ONLY then", I would say that it would be easier, if the mind is jumping all over the place focusing in the past, the future, here and there, at a rate of 100 things per second, it is more difficult to analize what is going on than if it was jumping at a rate of 10 things per seconds, and it would be easier if it jumped only at a rate of 1 thing per second. Once you are skillful in "watching the mind" at 1 thing per second, it will be easier to watch the mind when it is going full speed. In other words, once you are skillful at "watching the mind" while sitting on the cushion, it will be easier to watch it while you are: driving, walking, brushing your teeth, washing your hands, etc. > This kind of wrong understanding renders 99 > percent of our daily lives infertile for insight. If the practitioner thinks that ONLY while sitting on the cushion is the time to "watch the mind" then I agree with your statement. As I said in another thread, I use the cushion as a gym or training lab to improve my "watching" skill. Greetings, -- Hugo 39115 From: Hugo Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 7:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Value of discussion (was evil thoughts) Hello Phil, In summary I think we agree in all terms regarding discussions. In an earlier post I made some comments regarding it, but I will try to repeat my comments here to give continuity to your post. On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 09:28:31 +0900, plnao wrote: > I'm not so sure about this. I think there is much more danger of fabricating > theories > if we read suttas on our own, and reflect on them in isolation, without > discussing. It all depends on your personal skill and the skill of the people you are discussing with. Also, it depends on the "group psychology" that is playing on that specific group at that specific time. People tend to "support" their "friends" sometimes subconsciously. Once you have convinced certain key people, or the majority, it is easier to convince the rest, or in other words, it is easier to move masses than to move individuals. > The Buddha taught that the > company of "admirable friends" is one of the four factors of stream-entry - > in fact it's > the first one that he mentions. If we discuss with good friends, they help > us to see > the errors of our views. Now, how do we know they are "admirable?" That's > another question. Exactly!! So, as long as the discussion is skillful I think it is great. > Of course we should read the theories on our own, and reflect on them before > discussing. I guess > that's what James meant. Otherwise he and you and anyone else who agrees > with the above > statement wouldn't be posting here. Exactly!!!! I didn't join any discussion group on Buddhism until I had read and practiced at least enough to know and understand what people was talking about. > > My personal opinion is that if a discussion is getting too far from > > the facts (whatever is considered the "facts", e.g. the suttas), or if > > either part of the discussion don't "know enough", then in starts to > > be "mental fabrications" and it will lead us to wrong view, wrong > > action, etc. so I prefer to stop the discussion. > > Phil: You can also help people out. I am not saying that you should not help, I said that if the discussion becomes too much "I think", "I imagine", "I suspect", "I am not sure", "I wish", "what if", then it is probably going too far from the facts and getting into the imaginary. Sometimes a certain dose of imaginary thinking is useful, but watch out. > Phil: I think we might quickly assume that questions are in the final class > and give up on them, when in fact with a bit of generous effort > we would see that it is in the second or third class. And help people out > with a response. I agree, but see what I said above. > > Plus, there is the side-effect of the newcomers reading that false > > Dhamma (yes, I know "false Dhamma" is an oxymoron, but I am trying to > > make a point) and think that it is Dhamma. > > Phil: So how does sitting on the sidelines help them? There is a saying, let me try to translate it: "Of much help is that who doesn't get in the way". So, sometimes just by NOT interferring you are helping enough! (actually I think I have read this in different Buddhists books). Another danger is that when you help other people, you might reinforce your wrong theories, and when you see that the other people accept it and think they are true you get double reinforcement. > All middle way, of course. Exactly! Discuss, yes, but in balance with reading/listening, meditating, upholding virtues, etc. So as I said, I think we agree regarding the topic of dicussion. -- Hugo 39116 From: Hugo Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 7:29am Subject: Re: typo Re: [dsg] Value of discussion (was evil thoughts) On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 09:31:47 +0900, plnao wrote: > > Hi Hugh, and all > > > Of course we should read the theories on our own, and reflect on them > before > > discussing. > > revealing typo. My mind leaps so quickly to theorize about suttas that the > above > might as well be left as it is! Don't worry, I got the idea, and I replied accordingly. -- Hugo 39117 From: nina Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 8:05am Subject: foundation web links Dear Sarah, In India I received addresses of the Foundation web. I am not sure about the exact addresses, and if possible, would you make links, please? I think others may like to know too. Buddha Dhamma Org. Dhammahome.com Dhammastudyandsupport.com The last one is of the Bay area. Thank you for the trouble, Nina. 39118 From: nina Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 8:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 61 - Perception/Sa~n~naa (h) Dear Htoo, op 30-11-2004 19:40 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > > Is that Venerable Ananda? N: Yes. Paramatthajotikaa, Atthakatha to Khuddakapaa.tha, V, Mangalasutta. >> Co to Minor Readings, V, the Good Omen Discourse: >> <...Now my energy is over-exerted and so my cognizance tends to > agitation. I >> shall therefore see to balancing my energy...> >> He was going to take a rest. His feet had left the floor, but his > head had >> not reached the pillow. in that interval he became an arahat. >> Nina. P.S. Thanks for your kind encouragement re testmail. 39119 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 8:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi Larry, Ken, Howard, Yahoo did not deliver this email I wrote first: op 30-11-2004 15:32 schreef Larry op LBIDD@w...:> >> Ken O > Hi Ken, > > I've been thinking about your objection and this is what I have come > up with. Avijja is the ignorance of not knowing and the first link in > dependent arising. This ignorance IS sanna. N: Ignorance is a cetasika different from sañña which is one of the seven universals, arising with each citta. This is based on the Abhidhamma. L: Sanna always makes a > mistake, is always misknowledge, and is what perceives permanence. N: Only sañña arising with wrong view, akusala sañña, not evey kind of sañña. L: Moha is the ignorance of doubt. N: Moha is ignorance of realities, of kusala, of akusala, of nama and rupa. L: I have to say, with some considerable trepidation, the Buddha is > simply wrong when he says dependent on feeling craving arises. He > should have said dependent on perception craving arises. N: See Howard's mail. I think the D.O. is very complicated and there are many aspects to it. Not always all links are mentioned everywhere. The Omniscient Buddha had countless methods to explain the Truth, and there never is any contradiction. If there are things we do not understand we are wrong, we have the latent tendencies of ignorance and wrong view and we do not even realize this. We may be led by what we believe is our experience, but we have to be so careful. I think it really helps to consider very carefully the Tipitaka and Co. first of all. We can so easily be wrong. Now follows a second mail. op 01-12-2004 03:57 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > Yes, it is a higher level sa~n~na. But it isn't quite right to say > that sa~n~na is avijja itself. It is *infected* by avijja. In fact, I see > *all* > the links of D.O. as infected by avijja. N: Right, sañña is infected by avijja, also by other akusala cetasikas it arises together with. Citta and cetasikas condition one another by way of conascence, mutuality, association, etc. Each moment of sañña is different. > Howard: > This is much the point I made in all my "strange" writings about D.O. > In an arahant, the unraveling phase of D.O. has occured, and the > ignorance-conditioned links are all done and gone. An arahant recognizes, but > recognizes > correctly, with no distortion. That is no longer the same sa~n~na. N: We have to think of DO in reverse, the arahat is freed. L: Sanna is like a naive, simple, child. When you look at a tree you see > a whole tree and a permanent tree. This is sanna at work. N: Right. You think of the moneychanger! There is attaa-sañña, wrong remembrance of self, it sees a whole. Or: wrong remembrance when we think of the whole posture, we think of I who is sitting, don't we often? When pañña is developed there can be anattaa-saññaa. It ir right remembrance of anatta. Nina. 39120 From: nina Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 8:05am Subject: Visuddhimagga XIV, 119,120 Visuddhimagga XIV, 119,120 Vis. XIV, 119. (j) Because of the words 'Mind-element having arisen and ceased, also, next to that there arises consciousness, mind, mentation ... which is appropriate mind-element' (Vbh.89), [48] then resultant mind-consciousness-element without root-cause arises 'investigating' the same objective field as that received by mind-element. N: After the mind-element, mano-dhaatu, in this case the vipaakacitta that is receiving-consciousness, the mind-consciousness-element that is the investigating-consciousness arises. This is also vipaakacitta. Text Vis: When next to (55) unprofitable-resultant mind-element it is (56) unprofitable-resultant, and when next to (39) profitable-resultant [mind-element] it is either (40) accompanied by joy in the case of a desirable object, or (41)accompanied by equanimity in the case of a desirable-neutral object. N: When the investigating-consciousness succeeds the receiving-consciousness which is akusala vipaaka, it is also akusala vipaaka, since it is produced by the same akusala kamma that produced the sense-cognition (seeing etc.) that is akusala vipaaka. When the investigating-consciousness succeeds the receiving-consciousness which is kusala vipaaka, it is also kusala vipaaka, but in that case it is accompanied by pleasant feeling when the object is very desirable, or by indifferent feeling, when the object is moderately desirable. Therefore, there are two types of investigating-consciousness which are kusala vipaaka. Text Vis. : This is how the occurrence of three kinds of resultant consciousness should be understood as investigating. ------------------------ Note 48. See Ch. IV, note 13. N: The translator explains that the nucleus of process cittas is present in the Suttanta, but not the details. These we find partly in the Conditional Relations (Patthana), in the Book of Analysis, in the Path of Discrimination, and in extenso in the Commentaries. -------------------------- Vis: XIV, 120. (k) Next to investigation, (71) functional mind-consciousness-element without root-cause arises accompanied by equanimity 'determining' that same objective field. This is how occurrence of one kind of resultant consciousness should be understood as determining. N: The investigation-consciousness is succeeded by the determining-consciousness, votthapana-citta, which determines or defines the object. It carefully notes the object. As we have seen, this is the mind-door adverting-consciousness which performs the function of determining in a sense-door process. This citta which is neither cause nor result but an inoperative citta, an ahetuka kiriya citta, determines whether it will be succeeded by akusala cittas or by kusala cittas. We should know that determining is not the same as what we mean by determining or deciding in conventional sense. This is only one extremely short moment of ahetuka kiriyacitta that performs its function in a process of cittas. There is no one who decides, it depends on accumulations whether it will be followed by kusala cittas or by akusala cittas. **** Nina 39121 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 8:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] AN III - 100 mental misconduct vs. thoughts of ill-will Hello Phil, op 01-12-2004 00:33 schreef plnao op plnao@j...: > > "In the same way, there are these gross impurities in a monk intent on > heightened mind: misconduct in body, speech, & mind. These the monk -- aware > & able by nature -- abandons, destroys, dispels, wipes out of existence. > When he is rid of them, there remain in him the moderate impurities: ....(Snip) > A bit puzzled by the Buddha's examples of subtle defilements above. > Thoughts of caste, home district, not wanting to be despised seem fairly > crude.. They are the the aspects of the eight worldly concerns that seem > easiest to abandon. Concerns with pain and pleasure are the very subtle > ones, I would have thought. N:This refers to conceit that can only be eradicated by the arahat. Nina. 39122 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 8:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (was Re: Khanti is viriya ) Dear Rob K and Phil, I can't help feeling so delighted every time I read this quote about the elements: op 01-12-2004 02:20 schreef rjkjp1 op rjkjp1@y...: > "Because the >> functions of the elements give rise to the concepts of >> continuity, collection and form, the ideas arise: >> 1)the initial effort that has to be exerted when a >> deed is about to be performed and 2) the care that has >> to be taken while the deed is being performed to its >> completion and this leads to the subsequent ideas >> 3)"I can perform" and 4) "I can feel". Thus these four >> imaginary characteristic functions of being have >> bought about a deep-rooted belief in their existence. >> But the elements have not the time or span of duration >> to carry out such functions" . N: This is so good to rmeember when we study the process cittas of the Visuddhimagga! >> Phil: So yes, there is delusion when we think "I can >> perform." It is all elements. N: Good to take action, abstain from akusala, perform lots and lots of good deeds, but at the same time remembering: it is all elements. It is not so complicated, no controversies. If you had not heard the Dhamma you would not know about kusala and akusala. Appreciating Rob's reminders: R: Delusion is much deeper than when we think "I can perfom". The > khandhas really have fallen away, even before we know it. That is > why the Dhamma is so gradual and why the Buddha even considered not > to teach it. > Watch out for subtle ways selfview distorts practice, that is a > signpost. Nina. 39123 From: L.A. Uberstrasse Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 8:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Hi, i think the dissection of a smile is OK to examine if that is the goal. Everything Htoo is saying ishappening is certainly happening. But when it comes to applicable Dhamma in life, and what is produced through learning how a smile can change everything around you, going out there and doing it seems more useful to life here and now. SO if I want to break down an angry situation very fast, I inject a smile as Hugo says, it works to immediately diffuse the situation. If a tree has fallen on my head and I am having a lot of fear happening and pain arising, I bring up a smile and it carries me itno observation mode of what is actually really happening and I lighten up relaxing muscles immediately helping the situation. If I am in a bus and people are afraid cause two men are about to fight, I smile at the men and they break down their anger and it immediately changes the situation as I bring up how hard life is in the morning on a crowed bus in the cold of winter. If in the line at the super market and the mother in front of youis struggling with an unweildy child while she is struggling to empty her basket out to the cashier, I jusmp in with a mile and the attention of the child is in my smile now and the situation calms all around me and the child stops crying. Being up the smile. Use the smile. Bring it up from your wholesome mind, be in you hearts, in your eyes and put it on your lips just a little child does and you all, once upon a time, innocently did too.. But for goodness sake, don't leave it behind you in life. It is cheap and it is simple and it can change the world around you instantly to a more wholesome environment. SO dont' be afraid to SMILE today. Try it. (SMILE) At the same time as you feel these smiles moving the mind into a lighter position as you apply them releasing endorphines which help everything, consider investigating what happens when you take a lighter mind into a meditation session ... things change and it might be interesting to try this and to see what happens. A smile must be sincere to help in meditation as described above. An requested appearance on the outside doesn't help anything change on the inside unless it is sincere. This is important to remember. So if you do try this, let it come from your heart, your mind, your lips and ever so slightly on your face. Much Metta. KK 39124 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 8:55am Subject: [dsg] Re: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 61 - Perception/Sa~n~naa (h) Dear Nina, Once I read about that. That is Venerable Ananda attain arahatship before lying and no more in sitting position. I think someone also wrote at certain group about Ananda's attainment and balance. With Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina wrote: > Dear Htoo, > op 30-11-2004 19:40 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > > > > Is that Venerable Ananda? > N: Yes. Paramatthajotikaa, Atthakatha to Khuddakapaa.tha, V, Mangalasutta. > >> Co to Minor Readings, V, the Good Omen Discourse: > >> <...Now my energy is over-exerted and so my cognizance tends to > > agitation. I > >> shall therefore see to balancing my energy...> > >> He was going to take a rest. His feet had left the floor, but his > > head had > >> not reached the pillow. in that interval he became an arahat. > >> Nina. > P.S. Thanks for your kind encouragement re testmail. 39125 From: L.A. Uberstrasse Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 8:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Dear Hugo, I thought your espose on Anger Management was a beautiful example of the foru exertions. Thanks. It was inspiring to me to see it so well put. What you are demonstrating is also a good example of the Three characteristics of Anicca Dukkha and Anatta here. In putting on the smile you get to actually observe the dissolving and passing away of the Anger. (Anicca/Impermanence) By seeing the sensations in the body and mind of the arising painful Feeling and how it affects you and how the Craving grabbed you ( I don't like this at all ! ) and the Clinging might have started in ( I don't like this beacause and the story flys through the mind.... and) would evolve into the Being ( which is the re-action you used to have to whatever the situation is if it feels the same a soemthing previously coming up...from your memory before...) SO what you are doing is witnessing the occurance of the Dukkha/Suffering as it happens and you DO see it clearly SO When you apply Volition ( free will/choice) you Smile and you are actually letting go of what you have taken to be personal and stepped back into an impersonal perspective, even laughing, at being caught by the "feeling" of Anger and seeing for what it is which is just an impersonal feeling within a process that is occuring. You are seeing the (Anatta/Impersonal nature of the experience for yourself. Can you see this? Did I put it clearly enough to see? So you have, in fact followed Ken's advice too by stickingn to discovering and entirely understanding the Three Characteristics of Anicca, Dukkha and Anatta within each of these individual experiences. This is so great to see, isn't it? Much Metta. KK Hugo wrote: On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 17:18:15 -0000, htootintnaing wrote: > Hugo,it is good to read about your philosophical matters of > philosophers. But I do not believe these are Dhamma. I know that when I feel angry or upset, and force myself to smile, the anger diminishes or dissappears. I know that when I asked my wife to do the same one day she was angry at something (don't remember what), the same happened. That's what I know. Anger is one of the three poisons, when anger arises, this "forced smile" method makes it "go away", "diminish", "not flourish", "not make me do unskillful acts", use whatever phrase you think is proper. If the relationship of the above with the Buddha Dhamma is still not obvious, let me quote: There are these four right exertions. Which four? There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, arouses persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen... for the sake of the abandoning of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen... for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen...(and) for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen. These are the four right exertions. Just as the River Ganges flows to the east, slopes to the east, inclines to the east, in the same way when a monk develops & pursues the four right exertions, he flows to Unbinding, slopes to Unbinding, inclines to Unbinding. -- SN XLIX.1 Also: And what is the exertion to abandon? There is the case where a monk does not acquiesce to a thought of sensuality that has arisen [in him]. He abandons it, destroys it, dispels it, wipes it out of existence. He does not acquiesce to a thought of ill will... a thought of harmfulness... any evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen [in him]. He abandons them, destroys them, dispels them, wipes them out of existence. This is called the exertion to abandon. -- AN IV.14 More quotes at: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/wings/2c.html > If there is no wisdom or panna one even cannot distinguish between > akusala and kusala smile. I am not interested in distinguishing anything, Paul Ekman is, not me. I am not analizing the smile per se in "me" or in any "other", I don't care how the smile looks or how it is produced. I am interested in "abandoning" the angry state. -- Hugo 39126 From: L.A. Uberstrasse Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 9:13am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Dear Hugo, Ken and Htoo, I agree with Hugo that the most important thing here is the applicable reduction of suffering that can be found through actually practicing the Dhamma in life. Most of us would agree to this I think. Also, the balance of approach to study has been presented here often and this is an example of it. The Buddha encouraged us to approach our studies of the Dhamma through three "P" words is pali. Help me out here please Htoo? Para--- etc. etc. The Buddha impressed on us the importance of combined approach not separated and left hints all over theplace int he texts for us to do this in order to reach full understadning. So reading texts/Listening to them being read, doing the meditation, and developing knowledge for full undrestanding is what was undertaken back in the time of the Buddha. This thread is an example of how we should look for the balnce of the three approaches and the living result and not try to hold one up as more important than another, don't you agree? Much Metta. KK 39127 From: Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 4:53am Subject: A Gift of Smile Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Hi, KK - In a message dated 12/1/04 11:44:53 AM Eastern Standard Time, khantikhema@y... writes: > Hi, > i think the dissection of a smile is OK to examine if that is the goal. > Everything Htoo is saying ishappening is certainly happening. > > But when it comes to applicable Dhamma in life, and what is produced through > learning how a smile can change everything around you, going out there and > doing it seems more useful to life here and now. SO if I want to break down an > angry situation very fast, I inject a smile as Hugo says, it works to > immediately diffuse the situation. If a tree has fallen on my head and I am having > a lot of fear happening and pain arising, I bring up a smile and it carries > me itno observation mode of what is actually really happening and I lighten > up relaxing muscles immediately helping the situation. > If I am in a bus and people are afraid cause two men are about to fight, I > smile at the men and they break down their anger and it immediately changes > the situation as I bring up how hard life is in the morning on a crowed bus in > the cold of winter. > If in the line at the super market and the mother in front of youis > struggling with an unweildy child while she is struggling to empty her basket out to > the cashier, I jusmp in with a mile and the attention of the child is in my > smile now and the situation calms all around me and the child stops crying. > Being up the smile. > Use the smile. > Bring it up from your wholesome mind, be in you hearts, in your eyes and > put it on your lips just a little child does and you all, once upon a time, > innocently did too.. But for goodness sake, don't leave it behind you in life. > It is cheap and it is simple and it can change the world around you instantly > to a more wholesome environment. SO dont' be afraid to SMILE today. Try it. > > (SMILE) > > At the same time as you feel these smiles moving the mind into a lighter > position as you apply them releasing endorphines which help everything, > consider investigating what happens when you take a lighter mind into a meditation > session ... things change and it might be interesting to try this and to see > what happens. > > A smile must be sincere to help in meditation as described above. An > requested appearance on the outside doesn't help anything change on the inside > unless it is sincere. This is important to remember. So if you do try this, let it > come from your heart, your mind, your lips and ever so slightly on your > face. > > Much Metta. > > KK > ========================= STORY OF A SMILE: (Note: Neither my wife nor I are or ever were Christian.) My wife and I live in a suburb of N.Y. City. A number of years ago, Cardinal O'Connor, the Archbishop of New York, and a man we greatly admired, was terminally ill with cancer. He had not been seen publically by anyone, at St Patrick's Cathedral or elsewhere, for several weeks. One afternoon, my wife and I were heading uptown in Manhattan, going to the Metropolitan Museum of Art, I believe. We were riding up the street (I forget the name) one block east of 5th Avenue. (St Patricks in on 5th Avenue). In the left lane, at 51st or 52nd Street we were stopped in heavy traffic that had ground to a halt. For some reason, I turned to look over my left shoulder. There I saw a small-to-medium building similar in appearance to St Patrick's - sort of a miniturized version and apparently a residence of sorts. The two church-like doors then opened, and three men walked out and down a few steps towards a waiting limosine. I whispered urgently to my wife to look. The man on the left was a young priest. The man on the right was an older, taller man in a business suit. The man in the middle, supported by the others was Cardinal O'Connor. For both my wife and myself, time seemed to stand still. We each entered a state-of-mind that seemed "out of time". As we watched, we saw Cardinal O'Connor, no further than 10 feet from us, wince in pain. Immediately, then, glancing upwards, he looked intently and directly at us ... and he smiled. The smile seemed to "light up the world"! Then he entered the limosine, traffic started moving again - time started moving again! It was over. The Cardinal died within the week. This was an experience for us that will always remain a mystery and will never leave us - most especially that gift of smile. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39128 From: Ken O Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 10:04am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi KK The balance approach to dhamma is 8NT. What is not in the 8NT when we follow does not bring to an end of suffering. Lets not try new things like smiling just because others think it is right. If Buddha thinks it is right, then it is right. Other than that, what we think this is call correct practise is just our own inclination to believe. Ken O 39129 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 10:23am Subject: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Dear Ken O, A sharp mind. I do not think the text says that. With Metta, Htoo Naing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > Hi KK > > The balance approach to dhamma is 8NT. What is not in the 8NT when we > follow does not bring to an end of suffering. Lets not try new > things like smiling just because others think it is right. If > Buddha thinks it is right, then it is right. Other than that, what > we think this is call correct practise is just our own inclination to > believe. > > > > > Ken O 39130 From: Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 5:26am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi, Ken - In a message dated 12/1/04 1:20:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: > Hi KK > > The balance approach to dhamma is 8NT. What is not in the 8NT when we > follow does not bring to an end of suffering. Lets not try new > things like smiling just because others think it is right. If > Buddha thinks it is right, then it is right. Other than that, what > we think this is call correct practise is just our own inclination to > believe. > ====================== Sounds good! The Buddha smiled, but as for his followers, well, glum Buddhists are good Buddhist! ;-)) Er, excuse me. I mean :-(( With melancholy metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39131 From: Bhante Vimalaramsi Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 10:02am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Dhamma Greetings Ken O, Do you understand that the critical mind is a part of dosa? There is no need to be nasty! Just because you don't understand how soemthing can be of benefit doesn't mean that it is not of benefit. Please lighten up! Bhante Vimalaramsi 39132 From: Bhante Vimalaramsi Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 10:05am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Dhamma Greetings Howard, I guess by what Ken O says we are supposed to walk around being grumpy and say that this is the Buddha's teachings, Heh? But why did the Buddha say in the Dhammapada we are the happy ones? Interesting perspective. Maha-Metta always Bhante Vimalaramsi 39133 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 11:01am Subject: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Dear Ken O, Howard, KK and All, Smile smile smile while impending die Kind kind kind while implanting mind tie tie tie while incoming wild mind mind mind while you find it as it binds Htoo Naing Smile all the time until you die and implant a good and kind mind. While incoming events are wild ones calm down and tie your mind to purity. Please be careful and mind that the binding of tanha is so strong and if you find this just mind it and it would not come again for ever. Htoo --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Ken - > > In a message dated 12/1/04 1:20:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, > ashkenn2k@y... writes: > > > Hi KK > > > > The balance approach to dhamma is 8NT. What is not in the 8NT when we > > follow does not bring to an end of suffering. Lets not try new > > things like smiling just because others think it is right. If > > Buddha thinks it is right, then it is right. Other than that, what > > we think this is call correct practise is just our own inclination to > > believe. > > > ====================== > Sounds good! The Buddha smiled, but as for his followers, well, glum > Buddhists are good Buddhist! ;-)) > Er, excuse me. I mean :-(( > > With melancholy metta, > Howard > 39134 From: Bhante Vimalaramsi Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 10:12am Subject: Re: A Gift of Smile Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Dhamma Greetings Howard, Thanks for the story, nice! Thanks. I have read many articles about what happens in one's body when they smile, like the endorphines release and this causes pain in the body to diminish. And when one is meditating and joy arises the light happy feeling comes from the endorphines released. There is always a feeling of tranquility after the joy fades away and this is the effect of the endorphines, too. Maha-Metta always Bhante Vimalaramsi 39135 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 11:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What means 'no control' ? And band-aids Dear Joop, op 01-12-2004 14:14 schreef jwromeijn op jwromeijn@y...: quotes; Nina: This is frightening, isn't it? They are dormant in each citta, > they do not arise with the akusala citta, and thus we cannot say they > fall away. They condition the arising of akusala citta. … by > developing understanding of the eightfold Path, these latent > tendencies wear away. > > Joop > No, it's not frightening. I know I had to do work on the roots of > desire, hate and delusion, and developing understanding, in insight > meditation and in daily life, is good for that work. > Still in my (primitive) intuition it is a kind of atta-belief, to > think that 'things' like dispositions are more or less permanent. N: Not permanent, they change because new tendencies are added to them when akusala citta arises, and also, when understanding is developed they wear away. As to your words, I know I had to do work on the roots of > desire, hate and delusion, I just had a very good and simple text for our Pali lesson from John Kelly: N: we have to go to the roots, by developing understanding. > > J: >my main question still is: it still also the case for animals ? > Nina: Ken O explained, animals do not have the capacity to develop > understanding. Take the Bodhisatta's horse Kanthaka who was so sad to > have to return to the palace. But he was reborn a deva, and he could > then listen to the Dhamma. …I also feel a lot for animals. > > Joop: > I thought KenO said animals have only a little capacity to develop > understanding. So somewhere hundred thousands years ago that capacity > (that faculty) started. N: Take the former lives of the Bodhisatta, he often was a wise animal, but he was exceptional. He referred to himself in these lives, and why should he talk fairy tales? Also we ourselves must have been animals in former lives. Many different accumulations in different lives. J: What to say on the story of that horse ? I like fairy tales but I > don't really think Kanthaka could (as a deva) listen to the Dhamma: > does a deva have ears and who's talking, N: We read in many suttas about Devas. They have ears, yes. They can discuss Dhamma. They listened to the Buddha and visited him. But you do not have to believe in them. Devas can listen and attain enlightenment in deva planes. (snip) ... Here is a sutta. If you do not believe in devas, you can still appreciate the lesson. As you say, what matters are paramattha dhammas. SN II, 6(6) "Kamada" At Savatthi. Standing to one side, the young deva Kamada said to the Blessed One: "Hard to do, Blessed One! Very hard to do, Blessed One" 149 "They do even what is hard to do, [O Kamada," said the Blessed One,] "The trainees endowed with virtue, steadfast. For one who has entered the homeless life Contentment brings along happiness." "That is hard to gain, Blessed One, namely contentment." "They gain even what is hard to gain, [O Kamada," said the Blessed One,] "Who delight in calming the mind, Whose minds, day and night, Take delight in development." "That is hard to concentrate, Blessed One, namely, the mind." "They concentrate even what is hard to concentrate, [O Kamada," said the Blessed One,] "Who delight in calming the faculties. Having cut through the net of Death, The noble ones, O Kamada, go their way." "The path is impassable and uneven, Blessed One."150 "Though the path is impassable and uneven, The noble ones walk it, Kamada. The ignoble ones fall down head first, Right there on the uneven path, But the path of the noble ones is even, For the noble are even amidst the uneven." Nina. Nina. 39136 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 11:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Death Dear Christine and Htoo, op 01-12-2004 12:00 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...:> > It is better to contemplate death at each action. > 'Daily' is still vague. > > I am sitting. I may die before standing. I am typing. I may die > before I finish. My arms are bended. I may die before they are > stretched out. N: And I think it is beneficial to contemplate death of each citta, momentary death! The seeing has fallen away completely when there is hearing. There were other cittas arising in processes betwen them and also there had to be bhavangacittas, otherwise seeing and hearing would be mixed, but they are completely separated. It does not seem so: it seems we are seeing and hearing at the same time. Wrong sañña. Nina. 39137 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 11:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: AN III - 100 mental misconduct vs. thoughts of ill-will Hello Phil, op 01-12-2004 14:14 schreef plnao op plnao@j...: > Does that mean > the doubt, wrong view, belief in efficacy of rites and rituals that > are wiped out at stream-entry? You say you "think" this is the case. Is that > confirmed in the Bhikkhu Bodhi > commentary? N: Ken had it exactly right. The Sutta refers to the defilements eradicated at the four stages of enlightenment. B.B. has only commentarial notes. For me this is not enough, so I take to the Thai which is complete. The Co. translated into English are scarce. Sorry for your computer, we shall miss you! I wish you could afford broadband. In one second all your mail comes running in. Nina. 39138 From: Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 6:38am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi, Bhante (and Ken) - In a message dated 12/1/04 2:14:48 PM Eastern Standard Time, bhantevimalaramsi@j... writes: > Dhamma Greetings Howard, > > I guess by what Ken O says we are supposed to walk around being grumpy > and say that this is the Buddha's teachings, Heh? But why did the Buddha > say in the Dhammapada we are the happy ones? Interesting perspective. ----------------------------------- Howard: Well, Ken's perspective is certainly far from mine, Bhante. Ken, I suppose you feel that the Dhamma, each "letter-of-the-law", is very fragile and needs protection. I'm quite certain that your intent is good and your position is well meant. But I think you are very much off the mark here. -------------------------------- > > Maha-Metta > always > Bhante Vimalaramsi =================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39139 From: nina Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 0:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendencies. Hi Mike, sorry for delay, some Email hurdles to take. op 28-11-2004 21:37 schreef m. nease op mlnease@z...: >> Latent tendencies are >> accumulated in each citta, from birth to death. They are accumulated even >> in >> kusala citta. > > Could you please clarify this--are akusala tendencies accumulated even in > kusala citta? N: Yes, they lie dormant in the continuity of cittas. Thus, no break. But they do not arise, they condition the arising of akusala citta. Here is a quote from what I translated before: 39140 From: nina Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 0:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: present moment, to Mike. Hi Mike, op 28-11-2004 21:34 schreef m. nease op mlnease@z...: > >>Quotes N: Understanding has to be developed, not of the dhamma appearing yesterday, >> but appearing now. It has just fallen away, agreed, but its characteristic >> can be known. >> Suppose you are angry, and there is wise attention to anger. The mind with >> wise attention cannot arise at the same time as the angry mind, how could >> they occur together. But wise attention can arise just after anger has >> fallen away. > > Yes, I think this is the way it must be if we accept that delusion and > understanding can't arise at the same moment--otherwise no hope of > understanding the characteristics of akusala. N: Yes, that is clearly expressed. L:I've wondered if this is why M: the word 'sati' is used for mindfulness--a somewhat odd usage as its literal > meaning is 'memory' as I recall. N: yes there is a stem remembering, sarati. But is is not like sañña which can also be unwholesome. Sati remembers, is non-forgetful of kusala. M: One minor detail, though--I think I > remember reading that a kusala citta can't arise immediately after an > akusala citta, because of the extreme difference between them--but that a > single moment of citta taking another object must occur in between. Does > this sound familiar? N: They arise in different processes of cittas. Never in the same process, that is citta niyama, the law or natural course of the order of cittas. M: The important point to me remains, though, that sati > actually (at least sometimes) is not exactly present, but can take an object > very recently arisen at a sense-door or the mind-door. I suppose that > sa~n~naa plays a part in this? N: Sati is mindful of the characteristic that appears. Cittas are so fast, we cannot count them. We know that there is seeing now, different from thinking about what is seen, but that now has already gone. It is all in a flash. As I wrote to James, seeing could not know itself, it just sees. The hearing now, the sound now, don't you know it? We do not have to think: it is just past. Its characteristic is right there for pañña to understand. These are good points to discuss, also for me. Nina. 39141 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 0:10pm Subject: Re: A Gift of Smile Hi Howard, I liked your sympathetic account of the Cardinal's smile. Nina. op 01-12-2004 18:53 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > we saw Cardinal O'Connor, no further than 10 feet from us, wince in pain. > Immediately, then, glancing upwards, he looked intently and directly at us ... > and he smiled. The smile seemed to "light up the world"! Then he entered the > limosine, traffic started moving again - time started moving again! It was > over. > The Cardinal died within the week. > This was an experience for us that will always remain a mystery and > will never leave us - most especially that gift of smile. 39142 From: Hugo Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 0:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Dear KK, On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 08:55:38 -0800 (PST), L.A. Uberstrasse wrote: > > Dear Hugo, > I thought your espose on Anger Management was a beautiful example of the foru exertions. Thanks. > Thanks. It was inspiring to me to see it so well put. > What you are demonstrating is also a good example of the Three characteristics of Anicca Dukkha and Anatta here. > > In putting on the smile you get to actually observe the dissolving and passing away of the Anger. (Anicca/Impermanence) [...] > Can you see this? Did I put it clearly enough to see? Yes, I can see, maybe "notice" would be a better term as I don't use my eyes, but I am definitely aware of this. > So you have, in fact followed Ken's advice too by stickingn to discovering and entirely understanding the Three Characteristics of Anicca, Dukkha and Anatta within each of these individual experiences. Yes. > This is so great to see, isn't it? Yes, unfortunately sometimes it is too fast, and the anger arises fully!!! -- Hugo 39143 From: Larry Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 1:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendencies. Hi Nina, First, in the line: ""In the section on Œbeing possessed of latent tendencies¹ the Buddha said : ¹Who is with the latent tendency of sense desire, he is possessed of it'." I assume "sense desire" is "kama raga". I am understanding this to mean desire for sense pleasure, and sense pleasure isn't a pleasant feeling that arises with sense consciousness but rather the pleasant feeling that arises with "liking" (lobha) a sense consciousness. So kama raga is actually desire for the pleasant feeling of sense desire, correct? Second, I have taken a closer look at latent tendencies and accumulations and I think we need another category for "habit". Is there such a category? Neither accumulation nor latent tendency seems to fit. It seems that latent tendency is a general tendency to act in a certain way but not specific enough to account for why one person likes sweet and another likes salt. Plus latent tendencies don't seem to account for many emotional (javana) reactions. If they did, there would be no path. Larry 39144 From: Larry Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 2:44pm Subject: Re: Visuddhimagga XIV, 119,120 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina wrote: > Visuddhimagga XIV, 119,120 snip> N: The investigation-consciousness is succeeded by the > determining-consciousness, votthapana-citta, which determines or defines the > object. It carefully notes the object. As we have seen, this is the > mind-door adverting-consciousness which performs the function of determining > in a sense-door process. This citta which is neither cause nor result but an > inoperative citta, an ahetuka kiriya citta, determines whether it will be > succeeded by akusala cittas or by kusala cittas. We should know that > determining is not the same as what we mean by determining or deciding in > conventional sense. This is only one extremely short moment of ahetuka > kiriyacitta that performs its function in a process of cittas. There is no > one who decides, it depends on accumulations whether it will be followed by > kusala cittas or by akusala cittas. Hi Nina, Where does this idea of accumulations come from? The only "accumulation" I can find is the accumulated factors of volitional activity. I am understanding accumulation as the integration of the various factors involved in kamma formation. In that sense accumulation is kamma. Are you saying kamma conditions kamma by natural decisive support condition but not by kamma condition? Can panna undermine natural decisive support condition? Larry 39145 From: Andrew Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 3:23pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Dear KK, Bhante V, Howard and others, Thank you for your lovely posts on smiling. On the one hand, I can see what you are all saying but I think it is unbalanced. For example, have you heard the English expression "grin and bear it", grin being a synonym of smile. This reflects my own experience that I can and do smile at times with an unwholesome mind. Am I abnormal? Not according to the psychology textbooks, one of which at hand says "in many situations in which people smile they are not expressing happiness or are probably not even feeling happy". Do you agree with this textbook observation? KK seems to me to be suggesting that we can change the world with a smile (in a manner of speaking). This reminds me of the question of to what extent, if any, can we control the prompting of consciousness in others? Sorry, but I don't think we can. At times, it may look like we are defusing a situation but who is to say that the 2 men about to fight when confronted by KK's smile are simply thinking to themselves "we need to find a dark alley where we won't be disturbed." KK may not like to think that that is happening, but who can say that it isn't? I think the Buddha's message goes far, far deeper than whether one is smiling or a "grump". And I think that believing one can control the behaviour of others by smiling is not accurate and likely to veer the mind towards eternalism and away from anatta. Am I being too harsh? Am I being coldly realistic? I'll let you be the judge of that and I promise not to take offense if you think I'm being a grump. Best wishes Andrew --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "L.A. Uberstrasse" wrote: > Hi, > i think the dissection of a smile is OK to examine if that is the goal. Everything Htoo is saying ishappening is certainly happening. > > But when it comes to applicable Dhamma in life, and what is produced through learning how a smile can change everything around you, going out there and doing it seems more useful to life here and now. SO if I want to break down an angry situation very fast, I inject a smile as Hugo says, it works to immediately diffuse the situation. If a tree has fallen on my head and I am having a lot of fear happening and pain arising, I bring up a smile and it carries me itno observation mode of what is actually really happening and I lighten up relaxing muscles immediately helping the situation. > If I am in a bus and people are afraid cause two men are about to fight, I smile at the men and they break down their anger and it immediately changes the situation as I bring up how hard life is in the morning on a crowed bus in the cold of winter. 39146 From: Andrew Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 3:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Value of discussion (was evil thoughts) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Hugo wrote: > Hello Phil, [snip] > I am not saying that you should not help, I said that if the > discussion becomes too much "I think", "I imagine", "I suspect", "I am > not sure", "I wish", "what if", then it is probably going too far from > the facts and getting into the imaginary. > > Sometimes a certain dose of imaginary thinking is useful, but watch out. Hi Hugo Am I to conclude from the above that you experience some "thinking" that is not "imaginary"? Can you please elaborate? There is a sutta in which the Buddha encourages us to say things like "I think" and "I suspect" when we are not claiming direct knowledge. In other words, he is warning us against the dangers of imagining that we know realities that we don't. How should we conduct a Dhamma discussion then, in your opinion? Best wishes Andrew PS yes, I'm grumpy this morning. Will have to drive into town and find someone to smile at me! [big smile] 39147 From: Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 10:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Hi, Andrew - In a message dated 12/1/04 6:29:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, athel60@t... writes: > Dear KK, Bhante V, Howard and others, > > Thank you for your lovely posts on smiling. On the one hand, I can > see what you are all saying but I think it is unbalanced. For > example, have you heard the English expression "grin and bear it", > grin being a synonym of smile. > -------------------------------------------- Howard: The point of that expression, of course, is not to have an emotion of hatred or distress or grief and to irrelevantly smile (like a moron!), but to exert effort at turning the mind in the direction suggested by the physical gesture of smiling. -------------------------------------------- This reflects my own experience that > > I can and do smile at times with an unwholesome mind. Am I > abnormal? Not according to the psychology textbooks, one of which at > hand says "in many situations in which people smile they are not > expressing happiness or are probably not even feeling happy". > ---------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't doubt that at all. If it is not an instance of attempting to turn the direction of one's mind, then it is something called "inappropriate affect". Inappropriate affect is, in varying degrees, abnormal. Of course, in mild degree, we all partake of a variety of abnormalities! ;-) ----------------------------------------------- Do you > > agree with this textbook observation? KK seems to me to be > suggesting that we can change the world with a smile (in a manner of > speaking). This reminds me of the question of to what extent, if > any, can we control the prompting of consciousness in others? Sorry, > but I don't think we can. > ------------------------------------------ Howard: I think that to a large extent we can. That's why people pay condolence calls for those in mourning. That's what comedians depend on to support themselves. And, in a darker direction, that accounts in part for the success of monsters such as Hitler. ----------------------------------------- At times, it may look like we are defusing > > a situation but who is to say that the 2 men about to fight when > confronted by KK's smile are simply thinking to themselves "we need > to find a dark alley where we won't be disturbed." KK may not like to > think that that is happening, but who can say that it isn't? I think > the Buddha's message goes far, far deeper than whether one is smiling > or a "grump". And I txink that believing one can control the > behaviour of others by smiling is not accurate and likely to veer the > mind towards eternalism and away from anatta. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: It's not a matter of control. It's a matter of influence and suggestion. And this is mostly important, not with regard to influencing others, but with regard to influencing oneself. ---------------------------------------------- > Am I being too harsh? > Am I being coldly realistic? I'll let you be the judge of that and I > promise not to take offense if you think I'm being a grump. > ---------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't think you are being either harsh or grumpy, but not quite realistic either. You are, in my estimation, merely emphasizing negative facts that should be considered but not made to predominate. ----------------------------------------------- > > Best wishes > Andrew > ========================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39148 From: plnao Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 3:53pm Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Dear Bhante Vimalaramsi > I guess by what Ken O says we are supposed to walk around being grumpy > and say that this is the Buddha's teachings, Heh? But why did the Buddha > say in the Dhammapada we are the happy ones? Interesting perspective. Following all this talk of smiling with interest. I think your paraphrase of Ken O is a bit uncharitable. He didn't say we should be grumpy. I imagine the Buddha said that we are the happy ones because we are following his path to liberation, not because we are cheerful all the time! On the other hand, there *is* the sutta in Samyutta Nikaya in which the devas wonder why the monks are so serene, so radiant. It is because they don't think of the future, or the past. They live on the present. (SN I 9, if I'm not mistaken.) Do they smile because they do so intentionally? Is there any other sutta in which the Buddha says that monks do so? I join Ken O (and others, I imagine) in wanting to know if there is such a teaching, because- in my case at least- I would like like to try it if that were the case. But I won't until I know that it was the Buddha's teaching. I think smiles are much more valuable when they arise due to conditions, as they did in the story I told you about smiling after doing metta meditation, smiling without knowing it. If I had smiled intentionally it wouldn't have been such a valuable experience, in my opinion. I think of smiles as flowers that we can cultivate, but not place on our face by intention. There is a sutta in Anguttara Nikaya (III.91) in which the Buddha teaches us that we can plough the field, and water it, and do other preparatory work, but we cannot will the plants to grow. They grow due to conditions, beyond our control. That's the way I feel about smiles. I always enjoy hearing a different perspective from you and your students. Metta, Phil 39149 From: plnao Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 4:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: AN III - 100 mental misconduct vs. thoughts ofill-will Thanks Nina, And Ken > > Does that mean > > the doubt, wrong view, belief in efficacy of rites and rituals that > > are wiped out at stream-entry? You say you "think" this is the case. Is that > > confirmed in the Bhikkhu Bodhi > > commentary? > N: Ken had it exactly right. The Sutta refers to the defilements eradicated > at the four stages of enlightenment. I learned this from you before, didn't I? I takes such a long time for Dhamma to soak into the hard ground of my brain. Thanks again, Ken. > B.B. has only commentarial notes. For me this is not enough, so I take to > the Thai which is complete. The Co. translated into English are scarce. O.K. I'll ask for your (and the group's) guidance if there are any suttas which seem especially important. Well, I guess they all are in MN. > Sorry for your computer, we shall miss you! I wish you could afford > broadband. In one second all your mail comes running in. It's not dead yet! But we'll see how long it lasts. I do have broadband. I half deplore the day it came into our lives. My internet time used to be limited to 10 hours a month. I was doing a lot more writing in those days - maybe a coincidence. Conditions, conditions... Metta, Phil 39150 From: m. nease Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 4:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendencies. Hi Nina, ----- Original Message ----- From: "nina" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 12:10 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendencies. Hi Mike, sorry for delay, some Email hurdles to take. op 28-11-2004 21:37 schreef m. nease op mlnease@z...: > Could you please clarify this--are akusala tendencies accumulated even in > kusala citta? N: Yes, they lie dormant in the continuity of cittas. Thus, no break. But they do not arise, they condition the arising of akusala citta. Thanks Nina, my understanding was that they are 'passed along' from citta to citta, including kusala cittas of course. But other than those 'inherited' from past cittas, kusala cittas don't accumulate new akusala do they? Thanks for you translation but I don't think it answered this question. mike p.s. Do let me know if I can help any more with your email. 39152 From: Andrew Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 5:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Hi Howard I've interspersed a few comments and questions below. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Andrew - > > In a message dated 12/1/04 6:29:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, > athel60@t... writes: > > > Dear KK, Bhante V, Howard and others, > > > > Thank you for your lovely posts on smiling. On the one hand, I can > > see what you are all saying but I think it is unbalanced. For > > example, have you heard the English expression "grin and bear it", > > grin being a synonym of smile. > > > -------------------------------------------- > Howard: > The point of that expression, of course, is not to have an emotion of > hatred or distress or grief and to irrelevantly smile (like a moron!), but to > exert effort at turning the mind in the direction suggested by the physical > gesture of smiling. Andrew: That's the point of the expression if read prescriptively. It can also be used descriptively eg. "when such and such happens, I just tend to grin and bear it." Don't forget the descriptive aspect, Howard! (-: > -------------------------------------------- > This reflects my own experience that > > > I can and do smile at times with an unwholesome mind. Am I > > abnormal? Not according to the psychology textbooks, one of which at > > hand says "in many situations in which people smile they are not > > expressing happiness or are probably not even feeling happy". > > > ---------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I don't doubt that at all. If it is not an instance of attempting to > turn the direction of one's mind, then it is something called "inappropriate > affect". Inappropriate affect is, in varying degrees, abnormal. Of course, in > mild degree, we all partake of a variety of abnormalities! ;-) Andrew: That psychology textbook also says that pain can be a cause of smiling. Might this not be one explanation for the cardinal's smile as he was being helped down the stairs, presumably on to hospital? > ----------------------------------------------- > Do you > > > agree with this textbook observation? KK seems to me to be > > suggesting that we can change the world with a smile (in a manner of > > speaking). This reminds me of the question of to what extent, if > > any, can we control the prompting of consciousness in others? Sorry, > > but I don't think we can. > > > ------------------------------------------ > Howard: > I think that to a large extent we can. That's why people pay > condolence calls for those in mourning. That's what comedians depend on to support > themselves. And, in a darker direction, that accounts in part for the success of > monsters such as Hitler. > ----------------------------------------- > > At times, it may look like we are defusing > > > a situation but who is to say that the 2 men about to fight when > > confronted by KK's smile are simply thinking to themselves "we need > > to find a dark alley where we won't be disturbed." KK may not like to > > think that that is happening, but who can say that it isn't? I think > > the Buddha's message goes far, far deeper than whether one is smiling > > or a "grump". And I think that believing one can control the > > behaviour of others by smiling is not accurate and likely to veer the > > mind towards eternalism and away from anatta. > ---------------------------------------------- > Howard: > It's not a matter of control. It's a matter of influence and > suggestion. And this is mostly important, not with regard to influencing others, but > with regard to influencing oneself. Andrew: Howard, do you claim to be able to intentionally influence the *direction* of another's consciousness? > ---------------------------------------------- > > > > Am I being too harsh? > > Am I being coldly realistic? I'll let you be the judge of that and I > > promise not to take offense if you think I'm being a grump. > > > ---------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I don't think you are being either harsh or grumpy, but not quite > realistic either. You are, in my estimation, merely emphasizing negative facts > that should be considered but not made to predominate. Andrew: Sorry, this doesn't make sense to me. Are you saying that (true) negative facts shouldn't be allowed to predominate over positive ones? That's a recipe for imbalance, isn't it? Best wishes Andrew 39153 From: plnao Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 5:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Death Hi Christine, and all Yesterday I was walking in the park and saw two pairs of women, one pair relatively young, one quite old. And I thought, well, look how similar they are in the way they are talking in pairs, holding similar bags, but one pair is so much older. Saw them in a crude way as messengers like the Buddha saw on his first ride around the block that day. This happens all the time. But then noticed that while the younger women had been talking about shopping, about something being expensive, deploring it, the old women were looking in a very intent, delighted way at the autumn leaves, and sharing their joy in the moment, observing how the leaves looked much more vibrant when backlit than from the side on which the sun was hitting. The older women were much younger, in terms of the kind of childlike curiosity that was arising, and the younger women were all caught up in material concerns despite being in the park on a lovely day. This made me think that it is the quality, if you will, of the nama, of the mental moments that are arising that is more important than the chronological age of people. And that these mental moments, this name, rises and falls, rises and falls, due to conditions. And that maybe consideration of death in the context of the rising and falling of these mental moments is a consideration of death that the Buddha didn't have on his first chariot ride when he saw the old and the sick and the dead, but which arose later, and was more important for his (and our liberation.) This is nothing new to anyone here, of course. We know that there is birth and death all the time, with every citta. And it's certainly easy enough to talk about that when I'm not dealing at this moment with the death of a loved one, etc. BTW, when you see Azita next, please pass on my fond regards and wish her a speedy recovery. She's fab! Metta, Phil > > I am reading a book called "Who Dies?" by Stephen and Ondrea Levine - 39154 From: Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 1:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Hi, Andrew - In a message dated 12/1/04 8:13:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, athel60@t... writes: > > Hi Howard > > I've interspersed a few comments and questions below. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > >Hi, Andrew - > > > >In a message dated 12/1/04 6:29:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, > >athel60@t... writes: > > > >>Dear KK, Bhante V, Howard and others, > >> > >>Thank you for your lovely posts on smiling. On the one hand, I > can > >>see what you are all saying but I think it is unbalanced. For > >>example, have you heard the English expression "grin and bear > it", > >>grin being a synonym of smile. > >> > >-------------------------------------------- > >Howard: > > The point of that expression, of course, is not to have an > emotion of > >hatred or distress or grief and to irrelevantly smile (like a > moron!), but to > >exert effort at turning the mind in the direction suggested by the > physical > >gesture of smiling. > > Andrew: That's the point of the expression if read prescriptively. > It can also be used descriptively eg. "when such and such happens, I > just tend to grin and bear it." Don't forget the descriptive aspect, > Howard! (-: > ------------------------------------------ Howard: How could I forgut with Jon, and now you, to remind me! ;-) Andrew, I don't put much stock in that "descriptive" interpretation. I don't buy it. I believe that what sounds exactly like prescription is, indeed, prescription. ----------------------------------------- > > >-------------------------------------------- > > This reflects my own experience that > > >>I can and do smile at times with an unwholesome mind. Am I > >>abnormal? Not according to the psychology textbooks, one of > which at > >>hand says "in many situations in which people smile they are not > >>expressing happiness or are probably not even feeling happy". > >> > >---------------------------------------------- > >Howard: > > I don't doubt that at all. If it is not an instance of > attempting to > >turn the direction of one's mind, then it is something > called "inappropriate > >affect". Inappropriate affect is, in varying degrees, abnormal. Of > course, in > >mild degree, we all partake of a variety of abnormalities! ;-) > > Andrew: That psychology textbook also says that pain can be a cause > of smiling. Might this not be one explanation for the cardinal's > smile as he was being helped down the stairs, presumably on to > hospital? > ----------------------------------------- Howard: I saw and understood the smile. It was a rueful, ironic smile that turned into a joyous smile. Cardinal O'Connor was an extraordinary man. The smile, BTW, had its effect. It did prompt a mental state in my wife and in me. And we will not soon forget it. ------------------------------------------- > > >----------------------------------------------- > > Do you > > >>agree with this textbook observation? KK seems to me to be > >>suggesting that we can change the world with a smile (in a manner > of > >>speaking). This reminds me of the question of to what extent, if > >>any, can we control the prompting of consciousness in others? > Sorry, > >>but I don't think we can. > >> > >------------------------------------------ > >Howard: > > I think that to a large extent we can. That's why people pay > >condolence calls for those in mourning. That's what comedians > depend on to support > >themselves. And, in a darker direction, that accounts in part for > the success of > >monsters such as Hitler. > >----------------------------------------- > > > > At times, it may look like we are defusing > > >>a situation but who is to say that the 2 men about to fight when > >>confronted by KK's smile are simply thinking to themselves "we > need > >>to find a dark alley where we won't be disturbed." KK may not > like to > >>think that that is happening, but who can say that it isn't? I > think > >>the Buddha's message goes far, far deeper than whether one is > smiling > >>or a "grump". And I think that believing one can control the > >>behaviour of others by smiling is not accurate and likely to veer > the > >>mind towards eternalism and away from anatta. > >---------------------------------------------- > >Howard: > > It's not a matter of control. It's a matter of influence and > >suggestion. And this is mostly important, not with regard to > influencing others, but > >with regard to influencing oneself. > > Andrew: Howard, do you claim to be able to intentionally influence > the *direction* of another's consciousness? > ------------------------------------------ Howard: Of course I do. I intentionally attempt to induce happiness in others and to reduce suffering in them by my words, actions, gestures, and demeanor, and my attempts are not without fruit. People can and do prompt changes in others all the time. Two days ago a colleague of mine and I went to the home of the parents of a young woman, 20 or 21, who had taken her own life. We *know* that by our words and our demeanor we helped these deeply mourning people. We prompted a degree of peace in them. We know this for ourselves, and we were told afterwards by a young woman of that community (it is an ultra-orthodox jewish community) of the wonderful impact that we made, especially on the mother. ------------------------------------------- > > >---------------------------------------------- > > > > > >>Am I being too harsh? > >>Am I being coldly realistic? I'll let you be the judge of that > and I > >>promise not to take offense if you think I'm being a grump. > >> > >---------------------------------------------- > >Howard: > > I don't think you are being either harsh or grumpy, but not > quite > >realistic either. You are, in my estimation, merely emphasizing > negative facts > >that should be considered but not made to predominate. > > Andrew: Sorry, this doesn't make sense to me. Are you saying that > (true) negative facts shouldn't be allowed to predominate over > positive ones? That's a recipe for imbalance, isn't it? > ------------------------------------------ Howard: If negative facts are predominant, then they predominate. If positive facts are predominant, then they predominate. I see imbalance in a viewpoint that is fearful of bringing a smile to one's face. ------------------------------------------ > > Best wishes > Andrew > ===================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39155 From: seisen_au Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 8:41pm Subject: Lokuttara Satipatthana? Hi Nina and Sarah, I was under the impression that Satipatthana could be both mundane and lokuttara? It has in this the couplets section of the Vibangha (p.269)> (The four foundations of mindfulness) Are supramundane (lokuttara). Any help appreciated. Thanks Steve --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear Sarah, > op 30-11-2004 11:50 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...: > > > I believe satipatthana refers to the mundane > > path. I think we discussed this before with regard to the Satipatthana > > Sutta, but I don't have any quote handy. > N: Yes, we discussed that when studying with Larry the Satipatthana > Sutta and commentary. It is mundane. And vipassana: goes up to lokuttara. > Nina. 39156 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 9:24pm Subject: India discussions - audio version Dear Friends, As promised, the recordings of discussions from our recent trip to India have now been uploaded here: http://www.dhammastudygroup.org/ If you have a broadband connection and a good computer, it should be possible to listen and download. (As they take up almost the entire memory, they will be removed when we have other edited recordings to upload soonish). If you need any assistance with this, pls don't ask us as we're seriously technology challenged enough these days. Possibly try Connie, RobM, Mike or James who are all very competent with these tech matters. If you're not able to listen or download or would like a copy anyway, we'll be glad to burn an Mp3 to send out by snail-mail. We expect to be sending quite a few out, so to make our task easier, if you'd like a copy, pls send me an email off-list (sarahprocterabbott@y...) with: ***** 1. 'India MP3 request' in the subject heading 2. Just your name and full address, including COUNTRY (in CAPS), so that I can just cut and paste it onto an envelope. (Pls send it again like this even if you know I somewhere have all your details or have sent you something before) 3. If you know a friend would like a copy (and will really listen to it!!), pls give them a link to this message, so they also send the correct details etc. (and maybe join our discussions too!) 4. In lieu of notes of receipt or thanks, pls send a message to the list with any comment or quote that you found helpful, puzzling or wrong so that we can all share your listening! 5. If you haven't received your copy within a month, better let me know! ***** This is the first big step in a very large (life-time!!) project we're undertaking to edit recordings of discussions in English with K.Sujin after suggestions from her on it. There will be more recordings to come soon. (This project also involves copying all our old cassettes into digital format. If anyone has any favourite old recordings, pls let us know off-list.) Metta, Sarah p.s apologies for sounding so officious here. ======== 39157 From: Andrew Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 9:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > > > > Andrew: Howard, do you claim to be able to intentionally influence > > the *direction* of another's consciousness? > > > ------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Of course I do. I intentionally attempt to induce happiness in others > and to reduce suffering in them by my words, actions, gestures, and demeanor, > and my attempts are not without fruit. People can and do prompt changes in > others all the time. Hi Howard I think we are at cross-purposes. I ask: do you claim to be able to intentionally influence the direction of another's consciousness? You answer: Yes, I claim to be able TO ATTEMPT to intentionally influence the direction of another's consciousness. You have just made my point in its pristine entirety. Thank you. One attempts with no guarantee at all of consciousness movement in the desired direction. In those circumstances, "influence" is somewhat too strong a word. And what happens, when the influencee has no attention directed your way when your attempt is made? In that case, "influence" is entirely out of place. Deep is this Dhamma and difficult to comprehend! Conditionality and dependent origination. Prescription looks like prescription. A mountain lake looks like glare and hundreds of little ripples. But to the Ariyan who sees to the lake bottom .... [Exits left to suck a lemon and thereby avoid a smile] (-: Best wishes Andrew 39158 From: L.A. Uberstrasse Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 9:46pm Subject: Re: A Gift of Smile Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Dear Howard, Thank you so much for sharing that story with us. It really ws touching. One can only guess. So beautiful.. KK ========================= STORY OF A SMILE: (Note: Neither my wife nor I are or ever were Christian.) My wife and I live in a suburb of N.Y. City. A number of years ago, Cardinal O'Connor, the Archbishop of New York, and a man we greatly admired, was terminally ill with cancer. He had not been seen publically by anyone, at St Patrick's Cathedral or elsewhere, for several weeks. One afternoon, my wife and I were heading uptown in Manhattan, going to the Metropolitan Museum of Art, I believe. We were riding up the street (I forget the name) one block east of 5th Avenue. (St Patricks in on 5th Avenue). In the left lane, at 51st or 52nd Street we were stopped in heavy traffic that had ground to a halt. For some reason, I turned to look over my left shoulder. There I saw a small-to-medium building similar in appearance to St Patrick's - sort of a miniturized version and apparently a residence of sorts. The two church-like doors then opened, and three men walked out and down a few steps towards a waiting limosine. I whispered urgently to my wife to look. The man on the left was a young priest. The man on the right was an older, taller man in a business suit. The man in the middle, supported by the others was Cardinal O'Connor. For both my wife and myself, time seemed to stand still. We each entered a state-of-mind that seemed "out of time". As we watched, we saw Cardinal O'Connor, no further than 10 feet from us, wince in pain. Immediately, then, glancing upwards, he looked intently and directly at us ... and he smiled. The smile seemed to "light up the world"! Then he entered the limosine, traffic started moving again - time started moving again! It was over. The Cardinal died within the week. This was an experience for us that will always remain a mystery and will never leave us - most especially that gift of smile. With metta, Howard 39159 From: L.A. Uberstrasse Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 10:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Hugo wrote: Yes, unfortunately sometimes it is too fast, and the anger arises fully!!! - >>>KK Stay light and laugh at yourself "when you get caught by the anger!" This will break the tension, immediately change the situation to one of observation/awaremness of the impersonal feeling arising, then let it go and take a look at what is really happening in the moment. Let it be a secret challenging game to see it sooner and sooner each time and let the laughter break the tension without moving forward into the birth of action..... Keep going with this.... Much metta. KK 39160 From: Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 5:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Hi, Andrew - In a message dated 12/2/04 12:28:25 AM Eastern Standard Time, athel60@t... writes: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > >> > >>Andrew: Howard, do you claim to be able to intentionally > influence > >>the *direction* of another's consciousness? > >> > >------------------------------------------ > >Howard: > > Of course I do. I intentionally attempt to induce happiness > in others > >and to reduce suffering in them by my words, actions, gestures, and > demeanor, > >and my attempts are not without fruit. People can and do prompt > changes in > >others all the time. > > Hi Howard > > I think we are at cross-purposes. > > I ask: do you claim to be able to intentionally influence the > direction of another's consciousness? > > You answer: Yes, I claim to be able TO ATTEMPT to intentionally > influence the direction of another's consciousness. > > You have just made my point in its pristine entirety. Thank you. > One attempts with no guarantee at all of consciousness movement in > the desired direction. In those circumstances, "influence" is > somewhat too strong a word. And what happens, when the influencee > has no attention directed your way when your attempt is made? In > that case, "influence" is entirely out of place. Deep is this Dhamma > and difficult to comprehend! Conditionality and dependent > origination. > --------------------------------------- Howard: No guarantees, that's right. Many conditions, that's right too. But people CAN influence others and do so all the time. C'mon, Andrew, you know that's so! Let's not try to score debating points. I told you about the condolence call I made the other day. That's not something unusual. People help people in many ways, and among them is in helping change their minds and perspectives. This is fact. ---------------------------------------- > > Prescription looks like prescription. A mountain lake looks like > glare and hundreds of little ripples. But to the Ariyan who sees to > the lake bottom .... > ----------------------------------------- Howard: Oh, please. When the Buddha taught his followers to take specific actions, which he most assuredly did, that was prescription, whether one is an Ariyan or a worldling. Andrew, have you bought into the perspective that there is nothing to do and nothing to be done? The perspective that all depends on causes and conditions, but your volition and volitional actions are not *among* those conditions? Where is the appeal in such helplessness and hopelessness? If progress on the Buddhist path cannot be affected by our actions, then taking refuge and "being a Buddhist" is utter nonsense. ------------------------------------------- > > [Exits left to suck a lemon and thereby avoid a smile] (-: > ------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, now! So all is not lost after all! :-) -------------------------------------------- > > Best wishes > Andrew > ======================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39161 From: L.A. Uberstrasse Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 10:19pm Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Dear Phil, Ken, and other Dhamma Friends, I agree with you all that the type of smile makes the difference of how it affects the world. There is a difference between a smile placed on a face and "bringing up a smile from within". I found it interesting that so many of you assumed that Bhante and I were speaking of placing a smile on your face instead of bringing up a sincere smile to work with. I am wonering why that is. Of course and unwholsesome smile would not do well, A plastered on smile will not do well either. The smile must be sincere. What you think and ponder on, that is the inclination of your mind. So why not ponder good feelings within. Why not choose a dull day of not taking anything personally and moving ina wholesome direction, allowing yourself to exude the wholesomeness and maybe even smile just like after the Metta session but keep it going..... This is just a continuation of the wholesomeness you are trying to move towards having all the time, right? There is nothing wrong with affecting those around you with a smile. If you have never done this before, then you are missing a good part of real communication. Can't hurt to try it. Much Metta. KK plnao wrote: Dear Bhante Vimalaramsi > I guess by what Ken O says we are supposed to walk around being grumpy > and say that this is the Buddha's teachings, Heh? But why did the Buddha > say in the Dhammapada we are the happy ones? Interesting perspective. Following all this talk of smiling with interest. I think your paraphrase of Ken O is a bit uncharitable. He didn't say we should be grumpy. I imagine the Buddha said that we are the happy ones because we are following his path to liberation, not because we are cheerful all the time! On the other hand, there *is* the sutta in Samyutta Nikaya in which the devas wonder why the monks are so serene, so radiant. It is because they don't think of the future, or the past. They live on the present. (SN I 9, if I'm not mistaken.) Do they smile because they do so intentionally? Is there any other sutta in which the Buddha says that monks do so? I join Ken O (and others, I imagine) in wanting to know if there is such a teaching, because- in my case at least- I would like like to try it if that were the case. But I won't until I know that it was the Buddha's teaching. I think smiles are much more valuable when they arise due to conditions, as they did in the story I told you about smiling after doing metta meditation, smiling without knowing it. If I had smiled intentionally it wouldn't have been such a valuable experience, in my opinion. I think of smiles as flowers that we can cultivate, but not place on our face by intention. There is a sutta in Anguttara Nikaya (III.91) in which the Buddha teaches us that we can plough the field, and water it, and do other preparatory work, but we cannot will the plants to grow. They grow due to conditions, beyond our control. That's the way I feel about smiles. I always enjoy hearing a different perspective from you and your students. Metta, Phil 39162 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 11:15pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 65 - Perception/Sa~n~naa (l) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.3 Perception(sa~n~naa)contd] ***** Saññå which arises with akusala citta is also akusala. Saññå may arise together with wrong view. When one takes for permanent what is impermanent the citta with wrong view is also accompanied by saññå which remembers the object in a distorted way. It is the same when one takes for self what is not self. We read in the Gradual Sayings, Book of the Fours, Chapter V, §9, Perversions) about four perversions (vipallåsas) of saññå, citta and diììhi: *** -Monks, there are these four perversions of perception (saññå), four -perversions of thought (citta), four perversions of view (diììhi). What -four? -To hold that in the impermanent there is permanence, is a -perversion of perception, thought and view. To hold that in dukkha -there is not-dukkha, is a perversion of perception, thought and view. -To hold that in the not-self there is self, is a perversion of -perception, thought and view. To hold that in the foul there is the -fair, is aperversion of perception, thought and view. These are the four -perversions of perception, thought and view… *** So long as we have not attained to the stage of paññå which knows the impermanence of nåma and rúpa, we may still think that people and things can stay, be it for a long or a short time. Nåma and rúpa are impermanent and thus they are dukkha, they cannot be true happiness. We still take what is dukkha for happiness and we still cling to the concept of self. We also take the foul for the fair. The body is foul, it is not beautiful. However, we cling to our body and take it for something beautiful. So long as one has not attained the first stage of enlightenment, there are still the perversions of saññå, citta and diììhi. The sotåpanna, who has attained the first stage of enlightenment, has eradicated diììhi, wrong view, and thus he has no more perversions which are connected with diììhi. But he has not eradicated all perversions since they are eradicated in different stages. The sotåpanna still clings to objects and therefore he can still have the perversions of citta and saññå while he takes for happiness what is not happiness and takes for beautiful what is foul. ***** [Ch.3 Perception(sa~n~naa)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 39163 From: plnao Date: Wed Dec 1, 2004 11:36pm Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi KK, and all KK I agree with you all that the type of smile makes the difference of how it affects the world. There is a difference between a smile placed on a face and "bringing up a smile from within". I found it interesting that so many of you assumed that Bhante and I were speaking of placing a smile on your face instead of bringing up a sincere smile to work with. I am wonering why that is. Phil: That's a good point. I did jump to assumptions without deeply considering the practice that the Bhante is talking about. Sorry about that. KK Of course and unwholsesome smile would not do well, A plastered on smile will not do well either. The smile must be sincere. Phil: So I would assume that the Bhante's teaching involves letting go of the practice on days that the smile does not arise easily in a sincere way? My suspicion is that people who were beginning the practice (not the Bhante or you) would force smiles even on days that the smiles weren't arising naturally and the practice could be a wee bit painful for everyone involved. But I certainly can see that if one's daily life is rooted in Dhamma, the smiles can arise relatively easily. But not always. KK What you think and ponder on, that is the inclination of your mind. So why not ponder good feelings within. Phil: Do we want to feel good all the time, or do we want to understand the nature of our minds, both the pleasant and the not so pleasant? I just wonder if the Bhante's teaching could lead beginners to believe that the Buddha's teaching is about feeling good. (I also thought that when I read all the references to releasing tension in the other meditation practice) Of course, we do become happier and more peaceful thanks to the Buddha's teaching - if we do. If we don't, when we don't, we can see that not-feeling good for what it is. Annica, anatta, and dukkha. I think sensing the impermanence of bad moods is more liberating in the long run than practicing in order to encourage pleasant moods. My opinion. KK Why not choose a dull day of not taking anything personally and moving ina wholesome direction, allowing yourself to exude the wholesomeness and maybe even smile just like after the Metta session but keep it going..... Phil: I would finish my metta meditation and go out in a metta mood. Until conditions took over. I remember resolving to be aware of every door I went through, in order to feel metta for every person on the other side of every door. I would write in my little notebook every morning, again and again and again such resolves. And some days the practice was more effective than others. Now I think more about upekkha than metta, though I do want to dwell more fully in metta someday. In upekkha, aware to the degree that I am capable of the three characteristics, there is nothing in the other person to get angry at. I have a certain freedom from the eight worldly concerns. A certain freedom, mind you - still very limited. And when metta arises, unexpectedly, it is so encouraging. And it conditions the arising of more, though I know not when. As I said once here, I think we don't move ourselves in to the "divine abides" (Brahma Viharas) we are moved in, by conditions. If we could do it ourselves, what good would they be? It would be like that Marx Brothers movie in which Groucho says he doesn't want to belong to a club that would have someone like *him* as a member. I wouldn't think as much of the Brahma Viharas if I thought if they were mind-states that a sleazy, irritable guy like me could move in to by intentional practices! "Here's the key! Move on in." The diving abides have tenants like *me*? No thanks! When my defilements have been eradicated, the Brahma-Viharas will arise and I'll find myself living in them! That will take many, many lifetimes, in all likelihood. For now, I will be content with the moments of metta when they arise. There is metta as I'm writing to you. I didn't know there would be. I had just awoken from a nap and was feeling cranky. Now I am feeling very friendly. Metta arising due to conditions, the main one at the moment being *you* KK. Thanks! There's no doubt that we all want the same thing - we want our minds to be more prone to loving-kindness. We just disagree about the rarity of that commodity in its pure form! In most cases when Western Buddhists talk about joy, there is so much attachment, so much lobha. I think the same thing goes for metta. Again, just my opinion. KK This is just a continuation of the wholesomeness you are trying to move towards having all the time, right? Phil: Not necessarily. There can be a lot of lobha when we think about metta.. When we want metta, aren't we just attached to having calm, to feeling emotional pleasantness? That is lobha. We will be happier on the surface, but maybe the binds of self will be growing tighter. I think there is a sutta in which the Buddha, or one of his disciples, says "your sukka is my dukkha." It might seem like dukkha to be resisting ways of practice that feel good, but there can be sukka in knowing that one is on the Buddha's path to liberation, even when one feel like crap! The crap one feels like is impermanent! Knowing that is where there is wholesomeness, I think. And knowing that the happy feelings are also impermanent, conditioned. KK There is nothing wrong with affecting those around you with a smile. If you have never done this before, then you are missing a good part of real communication. Can't hurt to try it. Phil: Absolutely. I do want to go back and read the Bhante's description of his practice more carefully. Again, sorry for jumping to conclusions and suggesting that it was about plastering false smiles. That was yet another moment of foolishness. . I have a lot of anecdotes about smiles and metta - it's something I've thought about a lot- but it looks like this discussion will be going on for awhile so I will lay 'em on you all somewhere else. Metta, Phil 39164 From: plnao Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 0:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 65 - Perception/Sa~n~naa (l) Hi all > So long as we have not attained to the stage of paññå which > knows the impermanence of nåma and rúpa, we may still think > that people and things can stay, be it for a long or a short time. So every time we see a loved one, there is sanna that helps us to remember who they are, and sanna that helps us to remember how much we love them, and sanna that feeds on and on in this way, with all our attachments. Also when we see someone and remember the reasons we don't like them. So without sanna, the fires of desire and hatred would go out. Do amnesiacs therefore have less dosa and lobha than people whose memory is functioning? (I know sanna isn't memory in the conventional sense, but..) Isn't there a Harrison Ford movie in which he gets shot in the head and becomes a much more peaceful person? In Japanese, the expression "ignorance is bliss" is translated as "the Buddha is ignorance." (shiranu wa hotoke) Of course, there is also sanna with the wholesome cittas that arise with panna, that allow us to see people and things as conditioned elements. And we don't have to be cold or unloving in those moments. We just know what's going on. We don't have to get shot in the head like Harrison Ford in that movie to learn to get along with our kids and save our marriages etc! There is a better way to put the fires out. Culivating panna that sees things for what they really are. We can do it! I really feel like using exclamation points today!!! Metta, Phil 39165 From: Andrew Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 2:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Hi Howard More below - if you can bear it. (-: I'm sure you can! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: [snip] No guarantees, that's right. Many conditions, that's right too. But > people CAN influence others and do so all the time. C'mon, Andrew, you know > that's so! Let's not try to score debating points. I told you about the condolence > call I made the other day. That's not something unusual. People help people > in many ways, and among them is in helping change their minds and perspectives. > This is fact. Andrew: I agree with the above 3-word sentence but with one qualification attached. In fact, that qualification is the sum total of my point. My sentence reads: "This is fact WHEN IT OCCURS". When we attempt to influence others, influence doesn't *always* occur. It does sometimes/frequently/often/whatever but not "always". That's my point. Simple but I think it's a very important point because it is consistent with conditionality and anatta (where "me" influencing "you" is just a collection of "mere expressions"). > Oh, please. When the Buddha taught his followers to take specific > actions, which he most assuredly did, that was prescription, whether one is an > Ariyan or a worldling. Andrew, have you bought into the perspective that there is > nothing to do and nothing to be done? The perspective that all depends on > causes and conditions, but your volition and volitional actions are not *among* > those conditions? Where is the appeal in such helplessness and hopelessness? If > progress on the Buddhist path cannot be affected by our actions, then taking > refuge and "being a Buddhist" is utter nonsense. Andrew: The anatta doctrine lies in the middle ground between the wrong views of eternalism and annihilationism. I'm trying to get my worldling head around anatta especially how there can be volition (cetana) and action but no "actor" in the ultimate sense. As the Buddha said, it is indeed hard to comprehend. If I may be critical for a moment (in the nicest possible way), some posts on DSG seem to me to veer towards the eternalist side (with cetana as the abiding pseudo-self) and others (hi Ken H) to the annihilationist side with strong emphasis on NOW and the separateness of mind-moments. Perhaps I will write more on this later ... lots of preparation to do for the Cooran weekend. In short, no, I'm not just debating for the fun of it. I haven't dismissed the "description argument" because, even if the suttas are full of prescription, that prescription must be understood within the descriptive framework of anatta, conditionality and dependent origination. For me, the "go out and smile at the world" thesis (as pleasant and attractive as it undoubtedly is) doesn't completely fit with conditionality. And I've been brave enough to say so despite all the (friendly) jibes about being afraid to smile! (-: > > [Exits left to suck a lemon and thereby avoid a smile] (-: > > > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Well, now! So all is not lost after all! :-) > -------------------------------------------- Please don't tickle my funny bone as you *know* how much I hate to smile! (-: Over and out for the weekend! Best wishes Andrew 39166 From: Ken O Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 2:25am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi Bante and Hugo and Howard I should say, smiling is not a method thought by Buddha by it can be a product of what taught by Buddha. We have to be clear, what is taught and what is the result being after doing what is taught by Buddha. If smiling is a result of kusala behaviour that is ok, but if one used smiling to condition a kusala behaviour, then we should be very careful because smiling can be conditioned by lobha. I did not one say one cannot smile but I am advising against using smile as a practise which is not found in the texts. Ken O 39167 From: Ken O Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 2:32am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi Bhante If you think where I am wrong and I am not following the texts, please tell me and I am most willing to discuss with you because I learn from discussion. As I say, lets dhamma be our guide and not our own experiences Ken O 39168 From: Ken O Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 2:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi Larry and (Howard) << Larry - I think because you think sanna in term as concept that is how you come to this conclusion. A concept can be a paccaya. But when Buddha speaks about D.O. is about reality. The mind is obsessed with concepts because of moha. Let say, take for example, like some of us like chocolate, when we see chocolate it will induced a pleasant feeling to arise due to our habitual infatuation with it (latency) and that condition cravings. But it is moha that blinds us that chocolate is real and not sanna. Sanna just help to construct the chocolate from visible object. If chocolate is taken in terms of visible object due to wise attention (seeing the three characteristics), the feeling arise maybe neutral (talking in terms of javana process) or pleasant (as kusala citta associated with panna can have neutral and pleasant feelings). >> - this is what I have written earlier but did not send to you so I have leave it as it is Lets first established whether feelings conditioned cravings. The Dispeller of Delusion, para 839 <> SN 12 Nidanasamyutta 66 (6) Exploration pg 605 <<"As he explores he understand thus: Whatever in the world has a pleasant and agreeable nature: it is here that this craving arises when it arises; it is here that it settles when it settles down.>> Give you a very detail description of ignorance Dispeller of Delusion 642. That is to say, knowledge is understanding. It (i.e. Understanding) makes known and plain the four truths with each meaning and each cause. But this ignorance when it arises does not allow that [understanding] to make that [Dhamma] known and plain; thus, because of it opposition to knowledge, it is unknowing. Also seeing is understanding. It sees quality. But ignorance when it arises does not allow it to see, thus it is unseeing. Also achievement is understanding. It achieves that quality. But ignorance when it arises does not allow it to achieve, thus it is non-achievement. Wakening, awakening and penetration are understanding. It wakens to that quality, awaken to it, penetrates it. But ignorance when it arises does not allow it to waken to, awaken to, to penetrate to, thus it is non-wakening, non-awakening, non-penetration. Prehending is understanding. It grasps that quality by seizing and pressing. But ignorance when it arises does not allow it to grasp by seizing and pressing; thus is non-prehension. Comprehending is understanding. It grasps that quality by plunging, entering into it. But ignorance when it arises does not allow it to grasp by plunging and entering, thus it is non-comprehension. Consideration is understanding. It considers right that quality. But ignorance when it arises does not allow it to consider rightly, thus it is non-consideration. Reflection is understanding. It reflects upon that quality. But ignorance when it arises does not allow it to reflect, thus it is non-reflection. “It has nothing that is clarified and it is itself action done without reflecting” is non-clarification. Stupidity is due to the state of one who is stupid. Folly is due to the state of a fool. Clear comprehension is understanding. It understands rightly the Dhamma of the four truths with each meaning and each reason. But ignorance when it arises does not allow it to understand that quality, thus it is non-clear-comprehension. Delusion is by deluding. Bewilderment is by bewildering. Confusion is by way of confusing. “It finds what should not be found” is ignorance, “It engulfs, causes to sink in the process [of existence]” is the flood of ignorance. “It yokes to the process [of existence]” is the yoke of ignorance. Because of rising again and again through not being abandoned, it is the inherent tendency to ignorance. “Like robbers that beset travellers on the road, it besets profitable consciousness, seizes it, plunders it” is the besetting of ignorance. Just as when the barrier the bar is dropped at the city gate, the exit of the people inside the city and the entry of the people outside the city is stopped, so indeed, in one in whose city-of-the-person this [ignorance] is dropped, the knowledge which is his exit is nibbana is stopped, this there is the barrier of ignorance. “That is unprofitable and it is a root-cause” or “it cause”; “that and no other is the delusion intended here” is delusion as root cause of the unprofitable” This is called ignorance characterised thus. Thus should the characteristics of ignorance be understood according to the 25 terms. Ken O 39169 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 3:23am Subject: [dsg] Re: Death Dear Htoo, Nina, RobK, Phil, and all, It was while we were in India that Shakti spoke on the subject of 'death'. She told how she had been a member of a group who had decided to meet regularly and live as if they had been told they had only a year left before dying. The group worked through another of Stephen Levine's books "A Year To Live - how to live this year as if it were your last". Shakti's group has just had its final meeting, and although no member of the group died, many had friends or relatives pass away during this time. She felt it was an interesting process, well worth the effort, and says she was grateful for the group support. I was surprised at the number of the human species who die each year on this earth, almost unimaginable - 70,000,000! Still ... I thought - that's in a year, and all but one or two are no body I know. Htoo's post brought it much closer, suggesting that I "contemplate death at each action" and stating that "daily is still vague". (not as comfortably vague as 'yearly' :-)) Nina urges even more precision - saying it 'is beneficial to contemplate death of each citta, momentary death'. RobK - yes, I recall you posting about maranasati over the last couple of years. You once referred me to the Visuddhi Magga 'Mindfulness of Death' the eight ways of recollecting Death - the eighth way is "as to the shortness of the moment" ... "'Life, person, pleasure, pain - just these alone Join in one conscious moment that flicks by. Ceased aggregates of those dead or alive Are all alike, gone never to return No [world is] born if [consciousness is] not Produced; when that is present, then it lives; When consciousness dissolves, the world is dead: The highest sense this concept will allow". This is how death should be recollected as to the shortness of the moment." Phil - thanks for the story of the two pairs of women. You know ... I'm not so sure I DO know that "there is birth and death all the time with every citta". I can think about this, about what I have read, or have been told - but .. I can't feel it, I can't see it. So, I don't personally 'know' the death of each citta. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 39170 From: plnao Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 6:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Death Hi Christine > Phil - thanks for the story of the two pairs of women. You > know ... I'm not so sure I DO know that "there is birth and death > all the time with every citta". I can think about this, about what > I have read, or have been told - but .. I can't feel it, I can't > see it. So, I don't personally 'know' the death of each citta. Of course I don't either. I don't even know rupa from nama yet much of the time. I was just repeating the teaching. I guess, though, that we've all had moments that we've seen into the khandas, have seen into the way what we take for people are rupa and nama, in absolute terms. Really seen into that, for a moment. And then they are people again, of course, and we love them, but that moment of insight changes the way we see people for ever. There is more detachment. Not much, but more than there was. But does that finally make it any easier to deal with losing them. I wouldn't know. But I will some day very soon. Then we'll see how my talk of death of cittas stands up! I think I mentionned this before, but I have been to an internet site which features all kind of gruesome photos of accidents, murders - even the execution of those prisoners in Iraq. I know this will sound weird to some, but there was something kind of surprisingly reassuring about looking at those photos. Just elements. I really did feel that. All that rupa lying beaten and battered and mangled on the ground. I don't think Dhama glorifies nama over rupa - or does it? But all those gory photos made me want to treasure each moment more, made me want to appreciate the cultivating of nama in a wholesome way, because the rupa of the body is bound to be rotten some day, and because there is knowledge of how rotten many people's minds become as well. I guess that was the point of what I wrote about those women. Their bodies were old but they were having a lot of fun - at that moment. They were definitely not rotten! I think of what Nina wrote once in a post. The hardness of the body is no different from the hardness of a log. The Buddha told Rahula to practice like earth. The earth of our bodies, the earth of soil. But there are sublime mental states such as the Brahma-Viharas. Reflection on death maybe leads our mind in wholesome directions, elevates our minds. Thus so many people turn to religion when they fear death coming. Usually running in fear to safe refuges, to a father figure with open arms and an eternal paradise. We don't have that in Dhamma. We have to have a lot of courage and keep cultivating detachment from self, keep cultivating panna, keep cultivating Brahma-Viharas, life by life, day by day. As for death of cittas, of course you're right, we don't know yet. That's at an advanced stage of insight. I was just - I really don't like this word - parroting. Metta, Phil 39171 From: Hugo Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 7:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Hello Andrew, On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 10:21:42 -0000, Andrew wrote: > conditionality and dependent origination. For me, the "go out and > smile at the world" thesis (as pleasant and attractive as it > undoubtedly is) doesn't completely fit with conditionality. Instead of trying to fix the world by smiling or anything else I think it is better to fix yourself (well, I know of anatta, but in this case it is useful to say "yourself"). My story is about how I fixed myself by smiling to myself! The result was that I was not angry and my family didn't suffer, so in a sense by fixing myself I fixed the world around me. A lot of effort is placed by many people to "fix what is wrong with the world", if instead of spending time in trying to fix the world they would fix themselves, the world would be much better. Other examples of that is when replying to some e-mails that make my anger arise, BEFORE typing I put a smile on my face, and then try to type......well, most of the time I don't type anything, or I write something polite. The result, the other person doesn't get an angry response, and there is the possibility that his/her anger is gone, but on the other hand if I reply with anger, it is probable that his anger will be fueled and reply back, and so on ad nauseaum. So there you go, another example of a smile that fixes myself also helps somebody else. Greetings, -- Hugo 39172 From: shakti Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 7:21am Subject: Reflectinons on India Dear Friends, It has been over 25 years since I first visited Lumbini, Nepal birth place of Lord Buddha. It was fantastic to return and see the improvements made to the sacred site. When I was there previously, only a mound of crumpling bricks stood, over the site where the Lord Buddha was born. Nearby was a filthy water pool, and a pillar that Ashoka had erected to mark the sacred area. Today the site has been carefully excavated to expose the exact spot where Buddha was born. A building has been erected over the spot and the adjoining area. The pool area has been cleaned and restored. A large area has been fenced off and the surrounding area, contains well manicured lawns and beautiful bodhi trees, covered with colorful Tibetan prayer flags. The surrounding area now has many spectacular temples, Thai, Tibetan, Burmese and Japanese. It was touching to see the improvements and the care taken to preserve the area. I wondered if Buddhism really was in decline, after seeing first hand the improvements. After talking with Sarah she said, that the decline of Buddhism was like the dow jones, even though there is some apparent upward movement at times, the trend is downwards. I marveled at how fortunate we were to be able to hear the dhamma and be in such sacred places. After leaving the peace and beauty of Lumbini and heading back to India, I was at once brought back to the reality of suffering in India. It seemed that everywhere I looked the whole of humanity was suffering. India is a non ending assault of the senses. Hotel rooms smell of detol (a cleaning agent), mold and dust. People reek of damp sweaty skin, onions and rancid hair oil. We bumped along down brown potholed roads to see tin and paper slums, surrounded by smoldering mountains of garbage. Nearby signs advertised household appliances and beauty products. Pigs, cows, crows, rats, cats and kids foraged the filth, while women in brightly colored saris walked, holding dirty, thin children on their hips. This was life in Bihar, poorest of the poor states in India. I thought about, how this was all just visible object and watched as the stories about it arose. I wondered about the difference between pity and compassion. About kamma, wondering what someone could have done to be born in such a situation. I was reminded of K. Sujin's words, that when we understand realities as they are, we are not worried about any situation. We choked in clouds of dust as our bus traveled along mile after mile. We listened to car horns blaring and the sound of screeching brakes. I realized it was better not to watch, as our expert driver continually swerved to narrowly avoid head-on collisions with trucks, cars, cows and slow moving tractors. I marveled at the apparent chaos and confusion, and wondered how anyone could make sense of driving in it. I contemplated what a good lesson this was on the fragility of life. I thought that death really could be in this moment. Still alive and back in the USA, I have spent my days eating wholesome food, breathing clean fresh air and staring at the endless, clear blue sky. I've gone for walks through the Rattlesnake wilderness area and smelt it's freshness. Of all the things learned on my Indian pilgrimage, one of the most significant was that everything that is experienced, must lead to detachment. That detachment is based on understanding and that panna conditions that detachment. To be detached with panna not with I, who is detached. I was continually reminded by K. Sujin that we can begin again and again and again. During a difficult time when there was a lot of dosa arising, due to a specific situation, I appreciated so much her kind words. She said, "when there is more understanding, there will be less dosa and lobha." With metta, Shakti 39173 From: Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 2:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Hi, Andrew - In a message dated 12/2/04 5:25:00 AM Eastern Standard Time, athel60@t... writes: > > Hi Howard > > More below - if you can bear it. (-: I'm sure you can! ----------------------------------- Howard: Not to worry - I'll just plaster on a smile!! ;-)) ---------------------------------- > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > [snip] > No guarantees, that's right. Many conditions, that's right too. But > >people CAN influence others and do so all the time. C'mon, Andrew, > you know > >that's so! Let's not try to score debating points. I told you about > the condolence > >call I made the other day. That's not something unusual. People > help people > >in many ways, and among them is in helping change their minds and > perspectives. > >This is fact. > > Andrew: I agree with the above 3-word sentence but with one > qualification attached. In fact, that qualification is the sum total > of my point. My sentence reads: "This is fact WHEN IT OCCURS". When > we attempt to influence others, influence doesn't *always* occur. It > does sometimes/frequently/often/whatever but not "always". That's my > point. > ------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree with that point. (That's what "No guarantees" means.) Now what? ;-) ------------------------------------------- Simple but I think it's a very important point because it is > > consistent with conditionality and anatta (where "me" > influencing "you" is just a collection of "mere expressions"). ----------------------------------------- Howard: Of course. ---------------------------------------- > > > Oh, please. When the Buddha taught his followers to take > specific > >actions, which he most assuredly did, that was prescription, > whether one is an > >Ariyan or a worldling. Andrew, have you bought into the perspective > that there is > >nothing to do and nothing to be done? The perspective that all > depends on > >causes and conditions, but your volition and volitional actions are > not *among* > >those conditions? Where is the appeal in such helplessness and > hopelessness? If > >progress on the Buddhist path cannot be affected by our actions, > then taking > >refuge and "being a Buddhist" is utter nonsense. > > Andrew: The anatta doctrine lies in the middle ground between the > wrong views of eternalism and annihilationism. I'm trying to get my > worldling head around anatta especially how there can be volition > (cetana) and action but no "actor" in the ultimate sense. As the > Buddha said, it is indeed hard to comprehend. > --------------------------------------------- Howard: Anatta, the fact as well as the teaching, is deep and subtle. Indeed it is hard to comprehend, but compellingly fascinating when glimmerings of understanding do appear. ------------------------------------------- If I may be critical > > for a moment (in the nicest possible way), some posts on DSG seem to > me to veer towards the eternalist side (with cetana as the abiding > pseudo-self) and others (hi Ken H) to the annihilationist side with > strong emphasis on NOW and the separateness of mind-moments. > ------------------------------------------ Howard: It is to be expected that there are errors of both sorts, and of varying degrees for each. Sometimes there is the need to list somewhat to one side to balance a tipping towards the other. (Of course, the middle-way of anatta is neither a midpoint between extremes nor an average.) In any case, as I see it, there is far more of a nihilist-annihilationist tendency here than a substantialist-eternalist one. I also believe that the most extreme annihilationist view, rarely seen "even here" ;-), is the most dangerous of all, because it may lead to a cold impersonalism, helplessness, hopelessness, and even amorality ("There is no 'I" to do right or wrong - its all a matter of whatever conditions happen to arise; so, que sera, sera." An illogical conclusion, I know, but one that the extreme annihilationist perspective is vulnerable to.) -------------------------------------------- > Perhaps I will write more on this later ... lots of preparation to do > for the Cooran weekend. In short, no, I'm not just debating for the > fun of it. I haven't dismissed the "description argument" because, > even if the suttas are full of prescription, that prescription must > be understood within the descriptive framework of anatta, > conditionality and dependent origination. For me, the "go out and > smile at the world" thesis (as pleasant and attractive as it > undoubtedly is) doesn't completely fit with conditionality. > ------------------------------------------- Howard: First of all, as Bhante and KK agree, certainly an empty smile "plastered on" is not only useless, but often misleading if not outright deceptive. But virtually any of us can, through memory or otherwise directing the mind, find something that encourages a smile to naturally come to the lips, and the combination of wholesome emotion with corresponding physical action, the two being mutually supportive, is most fruitful. And this *does* fit with conditionality, because one species of condition is kamma - volition and volitional action. There is no reason to treat cetana as an unwanted or abandoned stepchild. ------------------------------------------ And I've > > been brave enough to say so despite all the (friendly) jibes about > being afraid to smile! (-: ------------------------------------------ Howard: My apologies with regard to that. :-) ----------------------------------------- > > >>[Exits left to suck a lemon and thereby avoid a smile] (-: > >> > >------------------------------------------- > >Howard: > > Well, now! So all is not lost after all! :-) > >-------------------------------------------- > > Please don't tickle my funny bone as you *know* how much I hate to > smile! (-: > --------------------------------------------- Howard: ;-)) -------------------------------------------- Over and out for the weekend! Best wishes> > Andrew > > ======================== You have a good weekend, too, Andrew. Lots of smiling! ;-) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39174 From: Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 2:29am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi, Ken - In a message dated 12/2/04 5:29:04 AM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: > Hi Bante and Hugo and Howard > > I should say, smiling is not a method thought by Buddha by it can be > a product of what taught by Buddha. We have to be clear, what is > taught and what is the result being after doing what is taught by > Buddha. If smiling is a result of kusala behaviour that is ok, but > if one used smiling to condition a kusala behaviour, then we should > be very careful because smiling can be conditioned by lobha. I did > not one say one cannot smile but I am advising against using smile as > a practise which is not found in the texts. > > > Ken O > =========================== There are lots of useful, supportive practices that the Buddha did not teach. Bowing to Buddharupas is a ready example that I can think of! Somewhere the Buddha is reported to have said that whatever is conducive to the wholesome, to calm, etc is the Dhamma. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39175 From: shakti Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 8:01am Subject: need telephone # / email address Friends, Does anyone happen to know Jack and Oy's, (of California) telephone number and / or email address??? Thanks, Shakti 39176 From: Hugo Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 8:16am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hello Phil, On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 08:53:35 +0900, plnao wrote: > I join Ken O (and others, I imagine) in wanting to know if there is such a > teaching, because- in my case at least- > I would like like to try it if that were the case. But I won't until I know > that it was the Buddha's teaching. Interesting approach. I like to try things (no matter who says it) and check if they are in accord to what the Buddha taught. Also, I think there are a lot of documents in Pali (suttas?) that hasn't been translated, so I think Phil you will have to wait quite a looooong time to find out ALL that the Buddha taught. > I think smiles are much more valuable when they arise due to conditions, as > they did in the > story I told you about smiling after doing metta meditation, smiling without > knowing it. > If I had smiled intentionally it wouldn't have been such a valuable > experience, in my > opinion. I think, you, Ken and probably others are approaching my story the wrong way, one proof is the fact that at least a couple of people replied with a description on how a smile is produced, which has NOTHING to do with my story. It is like if I tell story on how I painted my house to a different color to "camouflage" it when it becomes dirty, and then people reply describing the chemical composition of paint. I said I used the paint to accomplish a task, does it matter what is the chemical composition of the paint? Probably if I want the paint to stay put for 10 or 20 years, but for the purpose I needed at that time, it worked fine. I will read and learn about painting IF and WHEN it is needed. I used to teach about computers, a lot of my colleagues got into discussing the inner guts of programs and computers to BEGINNERS, to people who was their first time in front of a computer. Do they need to learn the inner guts of the computers at that time? Now, in my story, I smiled to myself, I didn't get angry, my family didn't suffer because they didn't get an angry reply from me. That's valuable if you think about that! Phil, have you ever dealt with 2 and 3 years old kids? If not, let me tell you they are excellent teachers in this regard. When they are in a tantrum, if you talk to them in an angry voice, the tantrum gets worse, not better. I know first-hand, more than a few times a week, at home, at the mall, etc. So, if my son gives a tantrum, and I am angry, only nasty things happen that cause suffering to him, to me and to the rest of the family. If there is a tool (e.g. smile to myself) that helps me abandon the angry state, I think it is part of Right Effort to use it. Did Buddha taught how to deal with 2 or 3 years old?........not that I know of. So how will you deal with your 2 or 3 year old when he/she comes? There are multiple tools that help you, but which one you use it and how you use them, all depends on you. > I think of smiles as flowers that we can cultivate, but not place on our > face by intention. > There is a sutta in Anguttara Nikaya (III.91) in which the Buddha teaches us > that we can plough > the field, and water it, and do other preparatory work, but we cannot will > the plants > to grow. They grow due to conditions, beyond our control. That's the way I > feel about smiles. mmmm....you are looking at the smile as a goal, my story specifically says that the smile is a tool. Using that analogy that you mention, the smile would be the water to feed the flowers of good-will which will starve the weeds of anger, or if you want a more modern approach, the smile is the anti-weed product you spray on your lawn to avoid weeds and let the flowers arise. Smile is a tool, not a goal. -- Hugo 39177 From: Hugo Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 8:19am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Dear KK, On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 22:19:00 -0800 (PST), L.A. Uberstrasse wrote: > I agree with you all that the type of smile makes the difference of how it affects the world. There is a difference between a smile placed on a face and "bringing up a smile from within". I found it interesting that so many of you assumed that Bhante and I were speaking of placing a smile on your face instead of bringing up a sincere smile to work with. One clarification, in my story it is about "plastering" a smile on myself for myself trying to "call" the sincere smile, or at least to stop the arising of the anger. Most of the times both things happen. And again, I am trying to effect "myself" not "others" (but they will be effected as well). -- Hugo 39178 From: Hugo Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 8:24am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 10:25:19 +0000 (GMT), Ken O wrote: > I should say, smiling is not a method thought by Buddha by it can be > a product of what taught by Buddha. We have to be clear, what is > taught and what is the result being after doing what is taught by > Buddha. If smiling is a result of kusala behaviour that is ok, but > if one used smiling to condition a kusala behaviour, then we should > be very careful because smiling can be conditioned by lobha. Agree, and as I said in another post: 1) Calm the mind 2) Observe what defilements are there 3) Work on removing them. So, 1) is covered with 'smile', then in 2) you find that there is lobha, at 3) you work on removing lobha. > I did > not one say one cannot smile but I am advising against using smile as > a practise which is not found in the texts. I thought I was never going to hear/read that in a Buddhist circle, I thought that was only from other religions ("it is written there, that must be true. It is NOT written there, thou shall not do it"). But again, it is up to anyone to find out how to cross the river. If that works for you Ken, good. Greetings, -- Hugo 39179 From: Hugo Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 8:34am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) "Kalamas, don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, "This contemplative is our teacher." When you know for yourselves that, "These qualities are unskillful; these qualities are blameworthy; these qualities are criticized by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to harm & to suffering" -- then you should abandon them..." [...] "...Now, Kalamas, don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, "This contemplative is our teacher." When you know for yourselves that, "These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness" -- then you should enter & remain in them. [...] So what do you think, Kalamas: Are these qualities skillful or unskillful?" "Skillful, lord." "Blameworthy or blameless?" "Blameless, lord." "Criticized by the wise or praised by the wise?" "Praised by the wise, lord." "When adopted & carried out, do they lead to welfare & to happiness, or not?" "When adopted & carried out, they lead to welfare & to happiness..." [AN III.65] Practice in accordance with the Dhamma. Once you've gained a sense of the Dhamma through appropriate attention, the remaining step is to practice in accordance with the Dhamma. As with the first two factors for stream-entry, this process is twofold: adapting your actions to follow in line with the Dhamma (rather than trying to adapt the Dhamma to follow your own preferences), and refining your understanding of the Dhamma as it is tested in experience. MN 61: "What do you think, Rahula: What is a mirror for?" "For reflection, sir." "In the same way, Rahula, bodily acts, verbal acts, and mental acts are to be done with repeated reflection. "Whenever you want to perform a bodily act, you should reflect on it: 'This bodily act I want to perform -- would it lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both? Is it an unskillful bodily act, with painful consequences, painful results?' If, on reflection, you know that it would lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both; it would be an unskillful bodily act with painful consequences, painful results, then any bodily act of that sort is absolutely unfit for you to do. But if on reflection you know that it would not cause affliction... it would be a skillful bodily action with happy consequences, happy results, then any bodily act of that sort is fit for you to do. "While you are performing a bodily act, you should reflect on it: 'This bodily act I am doing -- is it leading to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both? Is it an unskillful bodily act, with painful consequences, painful results?' If, on reflection, you know that it is leading to self-affliction, to affliction of others, or both... you should give it up. But if on reflection you know that it is not... you may continue with it. "Having performed a bodily act, you should reflect on it... If, on reflection, you know that it led to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both; it was an unskillful bodily act with painful consequences, painful results, then you should confess it, reveal it, lay it open to the Teacher or to a knowledgeable companion in the holy life. Having confessed it... you should exercise restraint in the future. But if on reflection you know that it did not lead to affliction... it was a skillful bodily action with happy consequences, happy results, then you should stay mentally refreshed and joyful, training day and night in skillful mental qualities. [Similarly for verbal acts and mental acts, although the final paragraph concerning mental acts says:] "Having performed a mental act, you should reflect on it... If, on reflection, you know that it led to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both; it was an unskillful mental act with painful consequences, painful results, then you should feel distressed, ashamed, and disgusted with it. Feeling distressed... you should exercise restraint in the future. But if on reflection you know that it did not lead to affliction... it was a skillful mental action with happy consequences, happy results, then you should stay mentally refreshed and joyful, training day and night in skillful mental qualities." [MN 61] "Gotami, the qualities of which you may know, 'These qualities lead to passion, not to dispassion; to being fettered, not to being unfettered; to accumulating, not to shedding; to self-aggrandizement, not to modesty; to discontent, not to contentment; to entanglement, not to seclusion; to laziness, not to aroused persistence; to being burdensome, not to being unburdensome': You may definitely hold, 'This is not the Dhamma, this is not the Vinaya, this is not the Teacher's instruction.' "As for the qualities of which you may know, 'These qualities lead to dispassion, not to passion; to being unfettered, not to being fettered; to shedding, not to accumulating; to modesty, not to self-aggrandizement; to contentment, not to discontent; to seclusion, not to entanglement; to aroused persistence, not to laziness; to being unburdensome, not to being burdensome': You may definitely hold, 'This is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is the Teacher's instruction.'" That is what the Blessed One said. Gratified, Mahapajapati Gotami delighted at his words. [AN VIII.53] -- Hugo 39180 From: Ken O Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 8:42am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi Hugo To be honest, I have seen many buddhist like you try to justify a method that is not found in the text simply because it fits into your mental construct and also how this method fits into Buddha teaching. I think I have said enough of this, if you think that is a right practise, no one can stop you. Ken O 39181 From: Ken O Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 9:02am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi Howard Buddha also never teach you to bow to him as a method. How do one define supportive practises, is it on the basis on our own experiences. Bowing to Buddha rupas is not taught during Buddha time but recollection of Buddha is taught as a method. Bowing to Buddha at that time is out of respect of his supreme wisdom and also his compassion towards us by teaching us what he knows. We have to be clear because any wrong development we make, there is likelihood we are veering in the wrong way. We like to think that what we do are always true, good for the dhamma, in fact if we sit back and look in the text, it is no where to be found. When Buddha say do no evils, do all good (is it in Dhammapada?), it is a general statement, just like in brief, clinging of the five aggregates are suffering also in general and not in detail. It does not show the deep meaning behind such a statement. Only interpolation with other suttas and texts, the depth of the these statements are fully flavour. Ken O 39182 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 9:13am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 148 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, We are discussing on 8 mahakiriya cittas. These are realities. These are cittas. These are dhamma molecules because they are made up of dhamma atom citta and other 35 dhamma atoms cetasikas. Mahakiriya citta is accompanied by 35 cetasikas. They are 7 universal cetasikas, 6 pakinnaka cetasikas, 19 universal sobhana cetasikas, 2 appamanna cetasikas and 1 pannidriya cetasika(7+6+19+2+1= 35). There are 8 mahakiriya cittas. The first pair is 1. somanassa saha gatam nana sampayuttam asankharika citta 2. somanassa saha gatam nana sampayuttam sasankharika citta Both of these 2 cittas are accompanied by 35 cetasikas as stated above. But in the 2nd pair as they are nana vippayutta cittas, panna does not arise and there will be only 34 cetasikas. The 2nd pair of mahakiriya cittas is 3. somanassa saha gatam nana vippayuttam asankharika citta 4. somanassa saha gatam nana vippayuttam sasankharima citta Both of these 2 cittas are accompanied by 34 cetasikas. The 3rd pair is 5. upekkha saha gatam nana sampayuttam asankharika citta 6. upekkha saha gatam nana sampayuttam sasankharika citta There is no piti in these cittas. So 7+5+19+2+1= 34 cetasikas accompany the citta. The 4th pair is 7. upekkha saha gatam nana vippayuttam asankharika citta 8. upekkha saha gatam nana vippayuttam sasankharika citta There is no piti and no panna in these 2 cittas. So 7+5+19+2+0= 33 cetasikas arise with citta. In 8 mahakiriya cittas, there are 35,35 in the 1st pair, 34,34 in the 2nd pair, 34,34 in the third pair and 33,33 in the 4th pair of mahakiriya cittas. But here karuna and mudita do not always arise and when arise they do not arise together. So there will be 33,33- 32,32- 32,32- 31,31 if there is no appamanna. This means when arahats are not on the mood of karuna or mudita their mahakiriya cittas will have 33,32,32,31 for each pair. If arahats are on the mood of karuna or mudita then there will be 34,33,33,32 in each pair. Some say that they are not good at mathematics. This is not a problem. When we are contemplating on dhamma and dhamma calculation, we are free of hindrances and this help the contemplators to calm to some extent. So far we have discussed on 40 lokuttara cittas, 27 jhana cittas, 24 kama sobhana cittas. 40 + 27 + 24 = 91 cittas are all called sobhana cittas. So we have to discuss on other 30 cittas which are asobhana cittas or non-beautiful consciousness. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39183 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 9:34am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 149 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 30 asobhana cittas or 30 non-beautiful consciousness. They are 12 akusala cittas and 18 ahetuka cittas. 12 akusala cittas are ugly and they are not beautiful and everyone knows. 18 ahetuka cittas or rootless consciousness are also non-beautiful. Because they do not have beautiful cetasikas such as alobha, adosa, amoha. 12 akusala cittas are 8 lobha mula cittas, 2 dosa mula cittas, and 2 moha mula cittas. Among them lobha mula cittas arise most frequently. And it is the first javana citta in any given life even in hell beings. When dying, citta knows he is losing a home. As soon as die that is as soon as cuti citta arises, it passes away and a patisandhi citta which is the right result of the last javana cittas arises without any interruption temporally. But that next arising patisandhi citta may be anywhere depending on what vipaka citta it is. Citta loses it home when dies. Patisandhi citta is not javana citta. After patisandhi citta, many bhavanga cittas which are the same vipaka cittas with that foregoing patisandhi citta arise. This bhavanga cittas flow stops when manodvaravajjana citta which is the first vithi citta in a life arises. This manodvaravajjana citta is followed by javana cittas. These javana cittas which are the first javana cittas in any life are lobha mula cittas. This lobha mula cittas do arise in all sattas without exception including aggasavakas-to-be, paccekabuddhas-to-be, and Sammasambuddhas-to-be. When dying citta is losing its home. When it regains another home, this has to be a great joy and even hell beings have a great joy when they first appear in the hell realms. If 8 lobha mula cittas are well understood, this will be very valuable to differentiate between joy of lobha mula cittas and joy of other sobhana cittas. If not careful, even in the middle of mahakusala cittas vithi vara, lobha mula cittas can arise and the joy or piti in lobha mula citta may micmic piti of sobhana cittas. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39184 From: Hugo Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 9:44am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hello Ken, On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 16:42:42 +0000 (GMT), Ken O wrote: > To be honest, I have seen many buddhist like you try to justify a > method that is not found in the text simply because it fits into your > mental construct and also how this method fits into Buddha teaching. > I think I have said enough of this, if you think that is a right > practise, no one can stop you. I agree that we should watch out for our own views, actually in the Kalamas suttas, the Buddha warns us about it. Could you please recommend me a method that is in the texts that could help me abandon anger in a moment such as the one I described (i.e. lying down and being called for help just a few seconds afterwards)? I know of methods that would help me prevent that, but I am having problems at that very specific moment. Do you have such kind of moments? if yes, what do you do?, what should I do? I am asking sincerely as I want to learn, I am not playing intellectual games. -- Hugo 39185 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 9:53am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 150 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 8 lobha mula cittas. Lobha is attachment. Mula means 'root' 'foundation' 'base' 'radicle'. All 8 lobha mula cittas do have lobha cetasika as their root dhamma. That is lobha tree is supplied and supported by lobha root. These 8 lobha mula cittas are also dhamma molecules. They are made up of dhamma atom called citta which is very pure as it is just to know the object and other dhamma atoms called cetasikas. Because of these cetasikas originally pure citta becomes impure and has got the name akusala citta called lobha mula cittas. In 8 lobha mula cittas, 7 universal cetasikas and 6 pakinnaka cetasikas arise. 4 akusala-sadharana-cetasikas namely 1.moha, 2.ahirika, 3.anottappa, and 4.uddhacca also arise. As they are lobha cittas, there does arise lobha cetasika. Sometimes ditthi cetasika arises and sometimes mana cetasika arises. So in 8 lobha mula cittas there arise 7 + 6 + 4 + lobha + ditthi/mana arise. 7+6+4+2= 19 cetasikas arise in the 1st lobha citta. The first lobha citta is called 1. somanassa saha gatam ditthi gata sampayuttam asankharika citta. The 2nd lobha citta is the same with the exception of sasankharika. This citta needs promptness. So thina and middha cetasika arise as extra cetasikas and there will be 21 cetasikas in 2nd lobha citta. The 2nd citta is 2. somanassa saha gatam ditthi gata sampayuttam sasankharika citta. In the 3rd lobha citta there is no ditthi cetasika. But in place of ditthi, mana comes in and there will be 19 cetasikas in 3rd lobha citta. 7 + 6 + 4 + lobha + mana = 19 cetasikas. The 3rd lobha citta is 3. somanassa saha gatam ditthi vippayuttam asankharika citta. The 4th lobha citta is sasankharika citta and thina and middha arise. So there will be 21 cetasikas. The 4th lobha citta is 4. somanassa saha gatam ditthi vippayuttam sasankharika citta. So in the 1st 4 lobha mula cittas there are 19, 21, 19, 21 cetasikas in each of these 4 lobha mula cittas. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39186 From: Ken O Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 9:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi Larry and Howard There are many ways the D.O are explained. Howard you quote me MN 18 < feeling. What one feels, one perceives. What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one proliferates about. What one proliferates about is the source from which ideas derived from the proliferation of perceptions beset a person regarding past, future, and present visible forms cognizable by the eye [and o on].>> SN 12.53 Fetters (1) <> Then another way of looking at it SN 12.59 Consciouness <> SN 12.19 (9) The Wise Man and the Fool "Bhikkhus, for the fool, hindererd by ignorance and fettered by craving, this body has there originated. So there is this body and external name and form: thus this dyad.>> SN 14.9(9) Diversity of External Contacts "Bhikkhus it is in dependence on the diversity of elements that there arises the diversity of preceptions; in dependence on the diversity of preceptions tha there arises the diversity of intentions; in dependence on the diversity of intentions that there arises the diversity of contacts; in dependence on the diversity of contacts that there arises diversity of feelings; in dependence on the diversity of feelings that there arises the divesity of desires....>> There are still more of it I think Nidanavagga is a very good place to look at the many diverse way D.O is taught Ken O 39187 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 10:01am Subject: [dsg] Re: Death Dear All, There was a real person who really contemplate on real death. :-) This is a real story. There was a man living in a forest. Forest here means wood. Where he lived was not far from town area. He had funeral dealers make a coffin for him. He kept that coffin in his home compound in a secret area. He slipped in that coffin daily and slept in there daily. With Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > > Dear Htoo, Nina, RobK, Phil, and all, > > It was while we were in India that Shakti spoke on the subject > of 'death'. She told how she had been a member of a group who had > decided to meet regularly and live as if they had been told they had > only a year left before dying. The group worked through another of > Stephen Levine's books "A Year To Live - how to live this year as if > it were your last". Shakti's group has just had its final meeting, > and although no member of the group died, many had friends or > relatives pass away during this time. She felt it was an > interesting process, well worth the effort, and says she was > grateful for the group support. > > I was surprised at the number of the human species who die each year > on this earth, almost unimaginable - 70,000,000! Still ... I > thought - that's in a year, and all but one or two are no body I > know. Htoo's post brought it much closer, suggesting that > I "contemplate death at each action" and stating that "daily is > still vague". (not as comfortably vague as 'yearly' :-)) Nina > urges even more precision - saying it 'is beneficial to contemplate > death of each citta, momentary death'. RobK - yes, I recall you > posting about maranasati over the last couple of years. You once > referred me to the Visuddhi Magga 'Mindfulness of Death' the eight > ways of recollecting Death - the eighth way is "as to the shortness > of the moment" ... > > "'Life, person, pleasure, pain - just these alone > Join in one conscious moment that flicks by. > Ceased aggregates of those dead or alive > Are all alike, gone never to return > No [world is] born if [consciousness is] not > Produced; when that is present, then it lives; > When consciousness dissolves, the world is dead: > The highest sense this concept will allow". > This is how death should be recollected as to the shortness of the > moment." > > Phil - thanks for the story of the two pairs of women. You > know ... I'm not so sure I DO know that "there is birth and death > all the time with every citta". I can think about this, about what > I have read, or have been told - but .. I can't feel it, I can't > see it. So, I don't personally 'know' the death of each citta. > > metta and peace, > Christine > ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 39188 From: Ken O Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 10:16am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi Hugo I have the same problem with you about anger. I think my wife always complained I am quick in temper. And I know the only way that anger is looking it at it is wise attention (understand it as anatta, anicca and dukkha). My preference is to use anatta as it eradicates the I more effectively so lessen the concept that there is an I that is angry. There is no other way I think can be more beneficial than using wise attention. The problem with anger is sometimes the intensity or it is out of nowhere it arise strongly, these are due to our strong underlying tendency (habitual effect since limitless lives). When that kind of anger arise, I feelt that I am ovewhelm, and my wise attention did not help much because my panna is not strong enough to eradicate the underlying tendency. If I think I have reach a certain limit on my wise attention which is not strong enough to help me tide over it, the best sutta I known to recollect at that moment is Kakacupaama Sutta MN 21. I read it once in a while to remind myself. I know many times I lose to myself to anger, but I accept. It is important not to be remoseful over it because remorse is dosa rooted which in turns conditioned the underlying tendency (dont add wood into the fire). I think Phil is good at this. His experiences in eradicating dosa using wise attention on that moment it arise, is very good. I learn a lot from his experiences when he share in the list. Ken O 39189 From: Hugo Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 10:42am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Thanks Ken, I think I do that, but unfortunately sometimes that didn't work, that's why I needed to add something else. I need to give my mind a "whack" before I can do what you said: > And I know the only way that anger > is looking it at it is wise attention (understand it as anatta, > anicca and dukkha). [...] > The problem with anger is sometimes the > intensity or it is out of nowhere it arise strongly, I have done different experiments with anger, even to the point of being meditating and if I detect some anger arising (due to some thought that appears) I try to "play" with it, a couple of times it has gone "out of control" in the sense that then I feel really angry (don't think I go throwing things around the room). So far, the quickest way to "whack" it is to force a smile, then do the analysis and observation. BTW during those meditation sessions, I didn't use the "smile" method, I just watched the breath until the anger was extinguished. > I know many times I lose to myself to anger, > but I accept. Would you be willing to do an experiment for me? If you notice that you are "losing" the battle with anger after doing the observation, try smiling to yourself. I am curious if it would work with you as it seems that we share some characteristics. Let me know (off-list if you want) if you don't mind. > It is important not to be remoseful over it because > remorse is dosa rooted which in turns conditioned the underlying > tendency (dont add wood into the fire). Yes!!, I discovered that too!!!, sometimes I got frustrated after feeling angry and got a headache!! > I think Phil is good at this. His experiences in eradicating dosa > using wise attention on that moment it arise, is very good. I learn > a lot from his experiences when he share in the list. Yes, I read some of them. Greetings, and thanks again for replying, -- Hugo 39190 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 11:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendencies, accumulations. (Part I) Hi Larry,(Mike, Howard). op 01-12-2004 22:45 schreef Larry op LBIDD@w...: Where does this idea of accumulations come from? The only "accumulation" I can find is the accumulated factors of volitional activity. I am understanding accumulation as the integration of the various factors involved in kamma formation. In that sense accumulation is kamma. N: Yes, kamma is accumulated and even after aeons the force of kamma conditions the appropriate vipaka. But not only kamma that can produce result is accumulated, but also good and bad tendencies and these condition the arising of kusala cittas and akusala cittas when there are opportunities for them. Accumulation can be used in a wide sense: all our experiences are accumulated, so that we remember them later on. What we learn now is not lost, we can remember it. L: Are you saying kamma conditions kamma by natural decisive support condition but not by kamma condition? N: For kamma to produce result not only kamma-condition is necessary but also natural decisive support condition. L: Can panna undermine natural decisive support condition? N: No. It is the Law of Dhamma, Dhamma Niyama. This condition comprises many factors. Some examples: someone else's kusala can condition kusala for us, namely appreciation, anumodana dana. Howard and his wife were not staring at the sick cardinal with curiosity, they were looking with concern and compassion. This supported the Cardinal and he smiled with courage. A silent dialogue, and it was the rupa bodily communication that was produced by kusala citta, on both sides. Howard told us about his visit to a bereaved family he could console. This conditions for us anumodana dana. Sarah tells us about Anthony's kind gift so that we have anumodana dana. Natural decisive support condition is operating here. We talked about it with Rob M that it is kusala citta when others tell us about their kusala. In India A. Sujin talked much about seeing: it sees only visible object, no person or thing in it. I listened this morning and I stopped the tape to consider this again and again. Lodewijk had at first wondered why we keep on talking about this for years, but he said that he now sees that it is important. We are so forgetful of seeing, absorbed in the images, but we are reminded to be aware of seeing. Listening again and again! This is also natural decisive support condition operating. The listening, considering, these are accumulated and can condition direct awareness. > > ""In the section on Œbeing possessed of latent tendencies¹ the Buddha > said : > ¹Who is with the latent tendency of sense desire, he is possessed of > it'." > > I assume "sense desire" is "kama raga". I am understanding this to > mean desire for sense pleasure, and sense pleasure isn't a pleasant > feeling that arises with sense consciousness but rather the pleasant > feeling that arises with "liking" (lobha) a sense consciousness. N: There are many shades of dense desire. It can also be longing for something, being attached (different degrees), liking. It is accompanied by pleasant feeling or indifferent feeling. It likes the object that is experienced and this can be a dhamma: citta, cetasika or rupa, or a concept. Feeling cetasika can be an object of lobha or kamaraga. L:So > kama raga is actually desire for the pleasant feeling of sense > desire, correct? N: Yes, but pleasant feeling is not the only object it takes. See above: any object. Now to an example. Howard described with a few words the atmosphere of New York where we lived for six years long ago, when Lodewijk was a member of the Dutch mission to the U.N. Fifth Avenue, fiftysecond street, the Metropolitan Museum, St Patrick's cathedral, the archbishop's residence. We passed it so many times. It evoked attachment to this city, pleasant feeling, happy remembrance. In short, nostalgic longing. There was attachment in the past, accompanied by pleasant feeling, happy remembrance, they all arose and passed away, but they were accumulated. The latent tendency of kama raga inheres in a pleasant object, also in pleasant feeling, also in sañña, also in the other accompanying dhammas. When there are conditions kama raga can condition the arising again of liking and longing with pleasant feeling. This falls away and goes on as latent tendency, there is an adding on to the kama raga already accumulated. And so we continue in the cycle. Nina. (to be continued) 39191 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 11:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendencies, accumulations Part II. latent tendencies, accumulations Part II. Hi Larry (Mike, Howard), op 01-12-2004 22:45 schreef Larry op LBIDD@w...: Second, I have taken a closer look at latent tendencies and > accumulations and I think we need another category for "habit". Is > there such a category? N: Habit: an example. Since we are back from India Lodewijk has formed a new habit: reading a sutta at night, and I: reading a sutta with the breakfast coffee. (Phil will like this.) We can form new habits, break old ones, form good and bad habits. Habit: what we usually do, or think. What is often done becomes a habit. What is it? Citta and cetasika, kusala or akusala. It is the action of accumulating, during the period of javana cittas. Accumulation is a difficult word. As I said it also denotes what lies dormant, and these can be: good and bad dispositions. We read in the Path of Discrimination about them. Here is part of my Translation. Aasaya is accumulated good disposition, anusaya is unwholesome latent tendency. The text is about one of the Buddha's knowledges not shared by disciples, knowledge of people¹s biases and latent tendencies², åsayånusaya ñåña: L:Neither accumulation nor latent tendency seems > to fit. It seems that latent tendency is a general tendency to act in > a certain way but not specific enough to account for why one person > likes sweet and another likes salt. N: Different people accumulated like and dislike for different things. They have different talents. L:Plus latent tendencies don't seem > to account for many emotional (javana) reactions. If they did, there > would be no path. N: They condition the javana cittas, kusala or akusala. But we are not under the yoke of fate, there is a Path, good and noble habits can be formed, something *can* be done, but it is right understanding which conditions it. And this again is conditioned by association with wise friends. In our Vis study I quoted one of my favorite Expositor texts about a change from akusala to kusala: (Expositor p. 100): As to the word 'bent on' , the Pali has: pari.naamita, bend to, change into. There can be a change from akusala to kusala if one understands the right conditions to be cultivated. An abundance of right reflection is also a condition for kusala. We need good friends who give us stimulating talks. We then read that the Tiika refers to the four wheels that are favorable conditions for the arising of kusala citta with right understanding. These four wheels are: living in a suitable place, association with noble persons, right aspiration, and meritorious deeds formerly done. (See AN IV, 4, 1, The Wheel). Further on the Tiika mentions as conditions for the citta to be accompanied by wisdom: past kamma, maturity of the faculties, that is to say: the faculties of confidence, energy, mindfulness, concentration and wisdom which have to be developed.> Nina. 39192 From: nina Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 11:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: to Naresh, suttas Dear Naresh, op 29-11-2004 18:52 schreef naresh gurwani op nar_gurwani@y...: > > I was reading the e-book provided on Dhamma about > cita's & citasikas. All the experience is with citta , > the good deed, bad deed and also the result of it. Nina: Citta is the source of good deeds and bad deeds. Citta is accompanied by cetasikas performing their functions and one of them is intention or kamma. A good deed or bad deed is mental, it is the intention that makes the deed. Naresh: So > we need to understand when the citta arises & falls > away. And just observe, we cant do anything about it ? > is it so ? Nina: keen and sharp understanding of citta has to be developed before its arising and falling away can be experienced by wisdom. It is thanks to the Buddha that we learnt about wholesomeness and unwholesomeness. Learning about these helps to see the danger of unwholesomeness and the benefit of wholesomeness. This again is a condition to follow the Buddha's words: abstain from evil, develop what is good. We do not spend our lives just observing, but understanding of wholesomeness and unwholesomeness in our life can be developed. Here is a sutta that my husband likes so much. He says it is like the blow of a hammer. Gradual Sayings, Book of the Ones, the first suttas (translated by Ven. Nyanaponika, Wheel, 155-158): An undeveloped mind is citta that is devoid of mental development, and this includes calm and insight. All kinds of wholesomeness and understanding can be developed. If it were impossible the Buddha would not have exhorted to do so. Naresh: And resultant citta are according to kamma which we > have to undergo whether pleasnat & unpleasant. > If unpleasant what we can do about it, there is no > elimination possible ? Nina: Nobody can change the law of cause and result. Result cannot be changed, it has happened already. But only by the development of wisdom the causes of unwholesomeness can gradually be eliminated. Naresh: Again coming to wordly matters, if we have a desire > isit good or bad , as desires cant be destoyed , > everybody has desires.Some have desires for Money, > business, job, love etc. > And as per my knowledge till date desires helps to > move a person ahead or a motto in life which is i > think very important, this desire also involves > helping others. Nina: There can be selfish desire and you think this helps in society to move ahead. From the outward appearance you may think that this is true, but, read the following stanzas from the Dhammapada, vs 72-75 (translated by Ven. Narada): <72: To his ruin, indeed, the fool gains knowledge and fame; they destroy his bright lot and cleave his head. (Commentary: destroy his wisdom.) 73. The fool will desire undue reputation, precedence among monks, authority in the monasteries, honour among other families. 74. Let both laymen and monks think, "by myself was this done; in every work, great or small, let them refer to me". Such is the ambition of the fool; his desires and pride increase. 75. Surely, the path that leads to worldly gain is one, and the path that leads to Nibbana is another; thus understanding this the bhikkhu, the disciple of the Buddha, should not rejoice in worldly favours, but cultivate detachment.> If a person pushes himself forward at the cost of others, or uses dishonest means to earn money, his evil conduct will turn agains him. At first it may seem that he gains something, but in the end he is the loser. Desire to help others is wholesome desire, not the selfish desire that is unwholesome. They are different qwualities and let us learn the difference when they occur in our life. That is the beginning of the development of understanding. When you help others, there is some detachment, you do not think of your own confort. Let us verify this in our life. Nina. 39193 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 11:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendencies. Hi Mike, op 02-12-2004 01:39 schreef m. nease op mlnease@z...: > >> Could you please clarify this--are akusala tendencies accumulated even in >> kusala citta? > N: Yes, they lie dormant in the continuity of cittas. Thus, no break. But > they do not arise, they condition the arising of akusala citta. > M: Thanks Nina, my understanding was that they are 'passed along' from citta to > citta, including kusala cittas of course. But other than those 'inherited' > from past cittas, kusala cittas don't accumulate new akusala do they? > Thanks for you translation but I don't think it answered this question. N: We can say passed on, but this suggests something that lasts. Kusala citta does not accumulate new akusala, but it accumulates new kusala! This is the action of accumulation. If all your questions are not answered, do keep on!!! Larry asked just now questions and these are appreciated and most welcome to me. I see if I have time today. > M: p.s. Do let me know if I can help any more with your email. N: Thank you for all your help. Yahoo sent mails back to me, I had not turned on the new address as standard, but the helpdesk helped fast. Nina. 39194 From: Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 6:58am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi, Ken (and Hugo) - In a message dated 12/2/04 11:54:45 AM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: > Hi Hugo > > To be honest, I have seen many buddhist like you try to justify a > method that is not found in the text simply because it fits into your > mental construct and also how this method fits into Buddha teaching. > I think I have said enough of this, if you think that is a right > practise, no one can stop you. > > > Ken O > ======================= I think that you should consider the possibility of this being overly opinionated and critical of another's practice. You, I believe, please correct me if I'm wrong, don't meditate. Most Buddhists would consider that contrary to the Buddha's teachings. But that is your understanding, and no one should be critical of your practice or your understanding. You have a right to it, and no one, including me, knows for a fact that his/herr understanding of the Dhamma is "the" correct understanding or even a better understanding. Discussion consisting of "pointing out" and motivated only by welfare and the search for truth and peace is one thing, but our approach should always be gentle, and it should be carried out in a live and let live manner, I would say. Any practice motivated by the sincere wish to benefit self and others, motivated by metta and karuna, is good practice. It is best, of course, if the practice is also *right* practice, but what is right has to be determined, and is not perfectly clear. None of us has a monopoly on right understanding or on right interpretation of the Dhamma. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39195 From: Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 7:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi, Ken (and Larry) - I agree with the point you make in the following. Dependent origination is like a deep ocean whose bottom is hard to reach, and like a brilliant jewel with millions of facets. It's depth and complexity cannot be exaggerated. With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/2/04 1:08:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: > > Hi Larry and Howard > > There are many ways the D.O are explained. > > Howard you quote me MN 18 > < The coming together of the three is contact. Due to contact there is > >feeling. What one feels, one perceives. What one perceives, one > thinks about. What one thinks about, one proliferates about. What one > proliferates about is the source from which ideas derived from the > proliferation of perceptions beset a person regarding past, future, > and present visible forms cognizable by the eye [and o on].>> > > > SN 12.53 Fetters (1) > < can fetter, craving increases>> > > Then another way of looking at it > SN 12.59 Consciouness > < that can fetter, there is descent of consciouness. With consciouness > as condition, name and form [comes to be].....>> > > SN 12.19 (9) The Wise Man and the Fool > "Bhikkhus, for the fool, hindererd by ignorance and fettered by > craving, this body has there originated. So there is this body and > external name and form: thus this dyad.>> > > SN 14.9(9) Diversity of External Contacts > "Bhikkhus it is in dependence on the diversity of elements that there > arises the diversity of preceptions; in dependence on the diversity > of preceptions tha there arises the diversity of intentions; in > dependence on the diversity of intentions that there arises the > diversity of contacts; in dependence on the diversity of contacts > that there arises diversity of feelings; in dependence on the > diversity of feelings that there arises the divesity of desires....>> > > There are still more of it I think Nidanavagga is a very good place > to look at the many diverse way D.O is taught > > > Ken O > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39196 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 0:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] need telephone # / email address Dear Shakti, Thank you for your India reflections and the lessons you took from Kh. Sujin. Nice to read different impressions, and everybody says it in his/her way. Jack's old Email address is no longer O.K., but Kom knows. Nina op 02-12-2004 17:01 schreef shakti op deannajohnsonusa@y...: > Does anyone happen to know Jack and Oy's, (of California) telephone number > and / or email address??? Thanks, Shakti 39197 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 0:41pm Subject: Mast or Sorrowless Tree (Polyalthia longifolia var. pendula) - OT Hello All, This is off-topic but may be of interest to the returned India pilgrims. Some of you may remember a rather attractive evergreen tree with a straight stem, slender branches and a symmetrical pyramid-like crown. I have been having a difficult time finding information about it, even though it appeared to be fairly common in India. I have found it at last! yaaay! - it is popularly (but incorrectly) called an Ashoka tree and is apparently frequently confused with the real Ashoka tree (Saraca Indica) because the leaves of the two plants look similar. It is the Mast tree, also called Asoka Tree, Ashok Tree, Asupala Tree, and Sorrowless Tree (Polyalthia longifolia var. pendula). Here is a link to Daves Garden site which has a photo of this tree - I remember how tall, straight and beautiful they looked when planted one to two metres apart along property boundaries. http://davesgarden.com/pdb/showimage/37528.html/ metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 39198 From: plnao Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 3:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Hi Howard, and all I think this thread has gone on already beyond this, but please allow me to jump in quickly. > Howard: > No guarantees, that's right. Many conditions, that's right too. But > people CAN influence others and do so all the time. C'mon, Andrew, you know > that's so! Let's not try to score debating points. I told you about the condolence > call I made the other day. That's not something unusual. People help people > in many ways, and among them is in helping change0their minds and perspectives. > This is fact. I used to always refer to a teaching I had read somehwere, that the Buddha said "a thousand candles can be lit by a single flame" or words to that effect. I could never trace the proper reference for it. This inspired me, of course, and I talked of a metta ripple effect, of how an act of kindness can ripple through the world. Now having learned more about conditions I would be much more sober in my assessment of this ripple effect, perhaps thinking more of it as the ripples that can spread to a certain degree in running water but are quicly washed away by the current, rather than the ripples that spread so very nicely in a placid pond. I still do think of how my kindness (or lack of it) that arises in daily life can have a beneficial effect on others, or how a thought that I share here could possibly help others, but am much more sober about it. This might be a helpful simile - I thought of it this morning. If there is a stampede of cows going by in a corral (?), and you open a side gate, and greet the cows, or offer them whatever cows like, a few might come your way, but you won't be able to change the course of the stampede. Not a very good simile - people's thoughts are not as conditioned to rush uncontrollably as stampeding cows are - but it still might be helpful in pointing at understanding what we are up against when dealing with conditions. On the other hand, the effort to help others is always bhavana for ourselves, so it doesn't do any harm. And it *does* do good, at least a little. > ----------------------------------------- > Howard: > Oh, please. When the Buddha taught his followers to take specific > actions, which he most assuredly did, that was prescription, whether one is an > Ariyan or a worldling. Andrew, have you bought into the perspective that there is > nothing to do and nothing to be done? The perspective that all depends on > causes and conditions, but your volition and volitional actions are not *among* > those conditions? Where is the appeal in such helplessness and hopelessness? If > progress on the Buddhist path cannot be affected by our actions, then taking > refuge and "being a Buddhist" is utter nonsense. ] Seeing suttas as descriptive doesn't mean that there is nothing to done. Just that what is to be done is much subtler than following instructions, much subtler than taking specific actions. I think of the crossing the flood sutta. But I agree with you that there must be a reason that the language of the suttas seems as prescriptive as it does. My current suspicion is that many suttas can should be understood properly both as descriptive and prescriptive, depending on one's degree of insight, or the degree of insight that is there at any one moment. I think of this sutta passage, which I paraphrased in another thread: "A monk may discern that "when I exert a mental fabrication against this cause of stress, then from the fabrication of of exertion there is dispassion....when I look on with equanimity at that cause of stress, then from the development of equanimity, there is dispassion." ( from MN 101) Of course, this is only one small peice of a much larger sutta, so it is not wise to look at it out of context, but I will anyways! Seen as prescriptive, the sutta told me that I can discriminate between sources of suffering and abandon some and tolerate others with equanimity. In my case this was true, but the cause of stress I abandoned was very gross, very basic, very obvious. (I stopped watching the news, and therefore stopped delighting in chaos in Iraq) Seen as descriptive, the sutta points at the gradual cultivation of wisdom that knows what can be abandoned and what can be tolerated. It seems much more "true" this way, even though it no longer offers me quick fixes. But the quick fix it *did* offer when seen as descriptive was very helpful. An experienced meditator like yourself will appreciate this sutta on a much deeper level. I've only begun to think of this descriptive/prescriptive thing and have only begun to think about this sutta, but I offer this anyways in passing for what it's worth. Metta, Phil 39199 From: Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 3:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendencies, accumulations. (Part I) Hi Nina, I have a few qualms about your reply. But first a question, are latent tendencies and accumulations exactly the same or different? I would say accumulations can be either wholesome or unwholesome but latent tendencies are always unwholesome although bhavaraga (relishing the process) is confined to jhana which is supposed to be wholesome. N: "Accumulation can be used in a wide sense: all our experiences are accumulated, so that we remember them later on." L: What cetasika accumulates experiences and later remembers them? L: "Are you saying kamma conditions kamma by natural decisive support condition but not by kamma condition?" N: "For kamma to produce result not only kamma-condition is necessary but also natural decisive support condition." L: I'm not talking about kamma producing result. You said javana is conditioned by accumulations. What are these accumulations? They are the accumulations of previous javana cittas and related factors such as actions. However javana cannot condition javana by means of kamma condition even though javana is kamma. Therefore, javana must condition javana by natural decisive support condition. L: "Can panna undermine natural decisive support condition?" N: "No. It is the Law of Dhamma, Dhamma Niyama. This condition comprises many factors." L: I disagree. If I am in the habit of becoming angry in a certain kind of situation there is the possibility that panna could intervene, thus disrupting the usual reaction. This is the virtue of panna, to undermine latent tendencies and even wholesome accumulations by disrupting natural decisive support condition. Larry 39200 From: m. nease Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 4:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendencies, accumulations Part II. Hi Nina, Larry and All, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nina van Gorkom" To: Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 11:26 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendencies, accumulations Part II. op 01-12-2004 22:45 schreef Larry op LBIDD@w...: Second, I have taken a closer look at latent tendencies and > accumulations and I think we need another category for "habit". Is > there such a category? Nina, thanks for the notes on dispositions and tendencies. Larry's question reminded me of something I read recently I think in CMA about 'habitual kamma' (acinna kamma). As I recall it said that habitual kamma could condition rebirth in the absence of stronger past kamma. I also found this material at an interesting Singaporean temple's website at http://www.kmspks.org/activities/bbc/bbc7.htm#tag2c: 3. Habitual Kamma (Acinna Kamma) Acinna Kamma is that which one habitually performs and recollects and for which one has a great liking. Habits whether good or bad become second nature. They tend to form the character of a person. At leisure moments we often engage ourselves in our habitual thoughts and deeds. In the same way at the death-moment, unless influenced by other circumstances, we, as a rule, recall to mind such thoughts and deeds. (i) Cunda, a butcher, who was living in the vicinity of the Buddha's monastery, died squealing like a pig because he was earning his living by slaughtering pigs. (ii) King Dutthagamani of Ceylon was in the habit of giving alms to the Bhikkhus before he took his meals. It was this habitual Kamma that gladdened him at the dying moment and gave him birth in Tusita Realm. Just thought this all might be of interest. mike 39201 From: Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 4:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi Ken, K: "Larry - I think because you think sanna in term as concept that is how you come to this conclusion. A concept can be a paccaya. But when Buddha speaks about D.O. is about reality. The mind is obsessed with concepts because of moha. L: I would say D.O. is about delusion, the reality of delusion. Every link is a mistake. Moha is not a universal cetasika but sanna is. Sanna perceives everything as a concept, even anatta. Concept is the beginning and end of all delusion. If you understand sanna you can see _how_ delusion arises. I don't think you can say the same about moha. Larry 39202 From: Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 4:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendencies, accumulations Part II. Hi Mike, Thanks for this bit on acinna kamma (habitual kamma). If you run across any more on habit I would be interested, particularly with respect to sa~n~naa's role. Larry 39203 From: m. nease Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 4:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendencies. Hi Nina, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nina van Gorkom" To: Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 11:26 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendencies. > Hi Mike, > N: We can say passed on, but this suggests something that lasts. Right--so how would you express it? > Kusala citta does not accumulate new akusala, but it accumulates new > kusala! > This is the action of accumulation. Actually that's what I thought (though much rarer than anuasaya, I think). > If all your questions are not answered, do keep on!!! I think that's all for now Nina, thanks again. > N: Thank you for all your help. Yahoo sent mails back to me, I had not > turned on the new address as standard, but the helpdesk helped fast. Glad to hear it and of course always very glad to be of assistance. mike 39204 From: Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 4:42pm Subject: Vism.XIV,121 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 121. (l) Next to determining, if the visible datum, etc., as object is vivid,49 then six or seven 'impulsions' impel with respect to the objective fields as determined. These are one among (1)-(8) the eight kinds of sense-sphere profitable, or (22)-(33) the twelve kinds of unprofitable, or (72)-(80) the nine remaining sense-sphere functional. This, firstly, is the way in the case of the five doors. But in the case of the mind door those same [impulsions arise] next to (71) mind-door adverting. Beyond [the stage of] change-of-lineage50 any [of the following 26 kinds of impulsion] that obtains a condition51 impels; that is, any kind among (9)-(13) the five profitable, and (81)-(85) the five functional, of the fine-material sphere, and (14)-(17) the four profitable, and (86)-(89) the four functional of the immaterial sphere, and also (18)-(21) the four path consciousnesses and (66)-(69) four fruition consciousnesses of the supramundane. This is how the occurrence of the fifty-five kinds of profitable, unprofitable, functional, and resultant consciousness should be understood as impulsion. -------------------- Note 49. ' "If ... vivid (lit. large)": this is said because it is the occurrence of consciousness at the end of the impulsions that is being discussed. For an object is here intended as "vivid" when its life is fourteen conscious moments; and that should be understood as coming into focus when it has arisen and is two or three moments past' (Pm. 479). Note 50. 'This includes also the preliminary-work and the cleansing (see Ch. XXII, note 7), not change-of-lineage only' (Pm. 479). See also Ch. IV,74 and Ch. XXI,129. Note 51. ' "That obtains a condition": any impulsion that has obtained a condition for arising next to change-of-lineage, as that of the fine-material sphere, an so on' (Pm. 479). 39205 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 4:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendencies, accumulations Part II. Hello Mike, all, I've always found this story disconcerting ... Wonder if it could just have been because there were no narcotics for pain relief available then. Large numbers of people in the world do quite a bit of screaming from unrelieved, and unrelievable, pain in their terminal illnesses. Could there be so many pig slaughterers nowadays, do you think? ... possibly this story was passed on from people experiencing dosa because they were unable to relieve the agony of the dying Cunda, and maybe not even wishing to - so they indulged in a little 'just desserts' victim blaming. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "m. nease" In the same way > at the death-moment, unless influenced by other circumstances, we, as a > rule, recall to mind such thoughts and deeds. > (i) Cunda, a butcher, who was living in the vicinity of the Buddha's > monastery, died squealing like a pig because he was earning his living by > slaughtering pigs. 39206 From: Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 0:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi, Larry (and Ken) - In a message dated 12/2/04 7:30:29 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > L: I would say D.O. is about delusion, the reality of delusion. Every > link is a mistake. Moha is not a universal cetasika but sanna is. Sanna > perceives everything as a concept, even anatta. Concept is the beginning > and end of all delusion. If you understand sanna you can see _how_ > delusion arises. I don't think you can say the same about moha. > ====================== Hmm, not sure about this, Larry. The Buddha was free of delusion, but sa~n~na was still operative in him. All conceptualization is based in sa~n~na, and it is all an indirect knowing, but it isn't all a deluded knowing. That depends on whether ignorance still holds sway or not. I agree that in nonarahants concepts can and often do serve as carriers of ignorance. But so do sankhara, vi~n~nana, phassa, and vedana. In an arahant, there are still formational activities, awareness, sense impression, feeling, and perception-recognition. But these operate purely and free of ignorance. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39207 From: Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 0:23pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Hi, Phil - Accept possibly as regards emphasis, I agree with what you have to say in the following. One keyword you introduce, with regard to the Crossing of the Flood Sutta, for example, and that I think is particularly important, is 'subtle'. All Buddhist practice is subtle, especially after a certain point. Another point that you make, and that I think is worthy of even greater emphasis, is that kusala action, including action motivated by lovingkindness, even when limited in effect, is to the good. As the Buddha instructed in Dhammapada 183, "Avoid evil, do good, and purify the mind. This is the teaching of all Buddhas." With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/2/04 6:21:53 PM Eastern Standard Time, plnao@j... writes: > > > > Hi Howard, and all > > I think this thread has gone on already beyond this, but please allow me to > jump > in quickly. > > >Howard: > > No guarantees, that's right. Many conditions, that's right too. But > >people CAN influence others and do so all the time. C'mon, Andrew, you > know > >that's so! Let's not try to score debating points. I told you about the > condolence > >call I made the other day. That's not something unusual. People help > people > >in many ways, and among them is in helping change their minds and > perspectives. > >This is fact. > > I used to always refer to a teaching I had read somehwere, that the Buddha > said "a thousand candles can be lit by a single flame" or words to that > effect. > I could never trace the proper reference for it. This inspired me, of > course, > and I talked of a metta ripple effect, of how an act of kindness can ripple > through > the world. > > Now having learned more about conditions I would be much more sober in > my assessment of this ripple effect, perhaps thinking more of it as the > ripples > that can spread to a certain degree in running water but are quicly washed > away by the current, rather than the ripples that spread so very nicely in > a placid pond. > > I still do think of how my kindness (or lack of it) that arises in daily > life > can have a beneficial effect on others, or how a thought that I share > here could possibly help others, but am much more sober about it. > > This might be a helpful simile - I thought of it this morning. If there is a > stampede of cows going by in a corral (?), and you open a side gate, > and greet the cows, or offer them whatever cows like, > a few might come your way, but you won't be able to > change the course of the stampede. Not a very good simile - people's > thoughts are > not as conditioned to rush uncontrollably as stampeding cows are - but it > still might be helpful in pointing > at understanding what we are up against when dealing with conditions. > > On the other hand, the effort to help others is always bhavana for > ourselves, so it > doesn't do any harm. And it *does* do good, at least a little. > > > >----------------------------------------- > >Howard: > > Oh, please. When the Buddha taught his followers to take specific > >actions, which he most assuredly did, that was prescription, whether one > is an > >Ariyan or a worldling. Andrew, have you bought into the perspective that > there is > >nothing to do and nothing to be done? The perspective that all depends on > >causes and conditions, but your volition and volitional actions are not > *among* > >those conditions? Where is the appeal in such helplessness and > hopelessness? If > >progress on the Buddhist path cannot be affected by our actions, then > taking > >refuge and "being a Buddhist" is utter nonsense. > > ] > Seeing suttas as descriptive doesn't mean that there is nothing to done. > Just that > what is to be done is much subtler than following instructions, much subtler > than taking specific actions. > I think of the > crossing the flood sutta. But I agree with you that there must be a reason > that > the language of the suttas seems as prescriptive as it does. My current > suspicion is that many suttas can should be understood properly both > as descriptive and prescriptive, depending on one's degree of insight, or > the > degree of insight that is there at any one moment. > > I think of this sutta passage, which I paraphrased in another thread: > > "A monk may discern that "when I exert a mental fabrication against this > cause of stress, > then from the fabrication of of exertion there is dispassion....when I look > on > with equanimity at that cause of stress, then from the development of > equanimity, there is dispassion." ( from MN 101) > > Of course, this is only one small peice of a much larger sutta, so it > is not wise to look at it out of context, but I will anyways! > > Seen as prescriptive, the sutta told me that I can discriminate between > sources of suffering and abandon some and tolerate others with equanimity. > In my case this was true, but > the cause of stress I abandoned was very gross, very basic, very > obvious. (I stopped watching the news, and therefore stopped delighting in > chaos in Iraq) > Seen as descriptive, the sutta points at the gradual cultivation of wisdom > that knows what can be abandoned and what can be tolerated. It seems > much more "true" this way, even though it no longer offers me quick > fixes. But the quick fix it *did* offer when seen as descriptive was very > helpful. > An experienced meditator like yourself will appreciate this sutta on a much > deeper level. > I've only begun to think of this descriptive/prescriptive thing and have > only begun > to think about this sutta, but I offer this anyways in passing for what it's > worth. > > Metta, > Phil > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39208 From: m. nease Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 5:45pm Subject: Habitual Kamma, was latent tendencies, accumulations Part II. Hi Larry, ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 4:33 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendencies, accumulations Part II. > Thanks for this bit on acinna kamma (habitual kamma). My pleasure, Sir... > If you run across > any more on habit I would be interested, particularly with respect to > sa~n~naa's role. Of course sa~n~naa is a universal so present with all cittas--I don't know how it might be 'separated out' as a factor of acinna (acutally aaci.n.na) kamma or what its implications might be. I have Wijeratne & Gethin's 'Summary of the Topics of Abhidhamma and Commentary' by Achariya Anuruddha handy, so here's what they have to offer: Chapter Five The Process Free Summary of the Topics of Abhidhamma [Fourfold Kamma] ... (51) by way of giving results: weighty, near, habitual, and effective kamma: ... Commentary ... Habitual: that which is done often or, although done just once, often dwelt on. ... And from Bhikkhu Bodhi's CMA: The Process-Freed ... §19 By Order of Ripening ... (iii) habitual kamma... ... Guide to §19 ... Habitual (aaci.n.na) kamma is a deed that one habitually performs either good or bad. In the absence of weighty kamma and a potent death-proximate kamma, this type of kamma generally assumes the rebirth-generative function. ... Habitual kamma has seemed important to me for a long time, also before I read the above. Even overlooking its potential rôle in (as) pa.tisandhicitta, the countless results (vipakka) of habitual kamma in 'this lifetime' are attended of course by feeling; so the implications for happiness and unhappiness, kusala and akusala and their respective accumulations seem enormous to me. Just my opinion, of course, which I've found HIGHLY unreliable. mike 39209 From: m. nease Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 5:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendencies, accumulations Part II. Hi Chris, ----- Original Message ----- From: "christine_forsyth" To: Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 4:58 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendencies, accumulations Part II. > possibly this > story was passed on from people experiencing dosa because they were > unable to relieve the agony of the dying Cunda, and maybe not even > wishing to - so they indulged in a little 'just desserts' victim > blaming. I THINK I remember this story from a sutta, so I wouldn't dismiss it out of hand--that said, though, I feel the same way. I'm never easy with the 'stories' explaining kamma/vipakka in a way that sounds a lot like sin and divine retribution. Of course, my distaste doesn't mean they aren't true on some level... Cheers, mike 39210 From: Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 7:23pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Habitual Kamma, was latent tendencies, accumulations Part II. Hi Mike, I agree with your conclusions, which I snipped. Here are a few additional observations: M: "Commentary ...Habitual: that which is done often or, although done just once, often dwelt on." L: This looks like what Nina is calling accumulations, a habit with a tendency to repeat. However I don't see this sense of aayuuhana in the Buddhist Dictionary: "áyúhana: (karmic) 'accumulation', is a name used in the commentarial literature for the wholesome and unwholesome volitional activities (karma, q.v.) or karma-formations (sankhára; s. paticca-samuppáda), being the bases of future rebirth. " 'Accumulation', is a name for the karma-formations, and signifies those volitions (cetaná) which arise at the performance of a karma, first while thinking 'I will give alms', and then while actually giving alms (e.g.) for one month or a year. The volition, however, at the time when one is handing the alms over to the recipient; is called karma-process (kamma-bhava, s. Vis.M. XVII, IX, X). Or, the volitions during the first six impulsive-moments (javana, q.v.) depending on one and the same state of advertence (ávajjana, s. viññána-kicca), these are called the karma-formations, whilst the 7th impulsive moment is called the karma-process (kamma-bhava).... Or, each volition is called 'karma-process' and the accumulation connected with it, 'karma-formation'. " (Vis.M. XVII). Cf. paticca-samuppáda (2, 10) - (App.)." L: See also Vism.XIV,131: Now it was said above, 'Whatever has the characteristic of forming should be understood, all taken together, as the formations aggregate' (par.81). And here too, what is said to have the characteristic of forming is that which has the characteristic of agglomerating.57 What is that? It is formations themselves, according as it is said, 'They form the formed, bhikkhus, that is why they are called formations' (S.iii,87). ------------------------------ Note 57. ' "The characteristic of agglomerating" means the characteristic of adding together (sampi.n.dana); then they are said to have the function of accumulating, for the dhammas in the formations aggregate are so described because volition is their basis' (Pm.484). L: This adding together is very interesting to me. I've been considering understanding sankhara khandha and sankhara cetasikas as connectors and sankhata dhamma as connected dhamma. Of course no "formation" is an object of consciousness except as concept. So a "formation" is only an appearance to sa~n~naa. Interestingly the principal "connector" is samadhi cetasika. Its function is to "conglomerate conascent states". Food for thought. Larry 39211 From: Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 7:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendencies, accumulations Part II. Hi Christine, I think the pigs squeal because of fear, not pain. Possibly the same could be said of Cunda in that he adopted a similar mind-set out of habituation. Larry ------------------------- "Cunda, a butcher, who was living in the vicinity of the Buddha's monastery, died squealing like a pig because he was earning his living by slaughtering pigs." 39212 From: Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 7:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Howard: "Hmm, not sure about this, Larry. The Buddha was free of delusion, but sa~n~na was still operative in him. All conceptualization is based in sa~n~na, and it is all an indirect knowing, but it isn't all a deluded knowing. That depends on whether ignorance still holds sway or not." Hi Howard, I would say the Buddha's sa~n~na was not deluded only because he didn't believe it. A conceptual knowing is deluded unless it is informed by pa~n~na, seeing reality as it is. H: "I agree that in nonarahants concepts can and often do serve as carriers of ignorance. But so do sankhara, vi~n~nana, phassa, and vedana." L: I agree, particularly in regard to sankhara, but sa~n~na seems to have the explicit function of generating concept AND reasoning. This equals that or this is appropriate to that, seems to me, is the nucleus of logic. Larry 39213 From: Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 4:01pm Subject: Typo Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Hi again, Phil - In a message dated 12/2/04 8:40:55 PM Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: > Accept possibly as regards emphasis ===================== I must have been sleepy, Phil! For those on the list who are not native speakers of English, the first word above should have been 'except'. Sorry! ;-) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39214 From: Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 4:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi, Larry - In a message dated 12/2/04 10:47:39 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > I would say the Buddha's sa~n~na was not deluded only because he didn't > believe it. A conceptual knowing is deluded unless it is informed by > pa~n~na, seeing reality as it is. > ====================== Well, here's a question. Is a mere recognition of hardness *as* hardness deluded? I don't think so. If that recognition also carries with it the idea of hardness being a "thing", especially a self-existent thing, and/or if it carries with it the idea of that hardness being present to a cognizer, there you see ignorance being operative. But if there is nothing more than the recognition of hardness as what it is, I don't see illusion as being involved. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39215 From: Ken O Date: Thu Dec 2, 2004 9:56pm Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi Hugo I am delighted that you are willing to others type of view. Particularly in this list, there is also the emphasis of wise attention. This is a pecular list and I think only in this list where development of panna is the epitome of the way to salvation and others are just consequences of panna. H: Thanks Ken, I think I do that, but unfortunately sometimes that didn't work, that's why I needed to add something else. k: That is true. Most of time it may not work, but that does not mean there is no development panna. Everytime there is wise attention, there is a cause for salvation. I think we should not expect ourselves to overnight solve this type of anger because this anger has been with us since countless lives. There must be patience to eradicate this. I also read the paramis of patience - it can be found in U.P and also Abhidhamma.org where it describe all the paramis under Treatise of all Paramis H > I have done different experiments with anger, even to the point of being meditating and if I detect some anger arising (due to some > thought that appears) I try to "play" with it, a couple of times it > has gone "out of control" in the sense that then I feel really > angry (don't think I go throwing things around the room). > So far, the quickest way to "whack" it is to force a smile, then do > the analysis and observation. BTW during those meditation > sessions, I didn't use the "smile" method, I just watched the breath until the anger was extinguished. k: Hugo, do you have the SN series in hard copy. Read the portion where Buddha talks in D.O where it says on the part, oneself and others. These are very indicative statement on why sometimes purposedly actions can be a hindrance rather than beneficial. We wish we are free of such roots and we also wish there should be a better/quicker way to do this rather than just using wise attention. In the development of the path, we must accept every one step we move forward, there may be a thousand steps move backward. It does not mean that one thousand steps we move backward will negate the one step foward. To me one step forward in the right step, is a start, is a gaint leap. Ken O 39216 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 0:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: AN III - 100 mental misconduct vs. thoughts of ill-will Hi KenH, Phil, Shakti & All, Ken, if you're looking for a paper, take the one with this heading you wrote to Phil(39094) - a gem. I think it says it all. When it comes to the teaching of anatta, I don't think we can ever be extreme enough. > ------------------ > Ph: > Still reflecting on the way intentional action seems to be > effective with crude defilements in a way that it can't be with > moderate or subtle defilements. > ------------------- > KH:> Perish the thought! If there were intentional actions (a polite name > for 'rite and ritual') that dealt with crude defilements, the Buddha > would have delivered an entirely different Dhamma. It would have > listed steps just like we see in the instruction manual to a kit- > form set of shelves (or whatever). Instead, he described all the > different states of consciousness so that we could eventually verify > his descriptions for ourselves. .... S: There's nothing to add to this and other recent comments some of us have been making, but that won't stop me. Shakti summed up the essence of the teaching when she referred to the reminders about developing understanding with detachment on the trip. (And Shakti, I really enjoyed your post a lot - beautifully written.) As I'm writing mainly to the three of you, let me add a semi quote/semi parpahrase of some detail from points K.Sujin was making on another trip on similar themes to the ones you've all raised as I was listening to it/editing this morning and I know you'll find some helpful reminders here. Firstly, following a Qu about dosa (aversion), it was being stressed that we just want to escape from it instead of studying the characteristic when it appears. Usually we'd like to have no dosa and so it's lobha (attachment) again at these times. There must be understanding of the characteristic of dosa, otherwise there can't be the eradication of it. What should be understood first? Wrong view. This ditthi must be eradicated first, the attachment to taking dosa and all the other realities for self. After this, there will still be attachment to sensuous objects, but not 'me' that is attached and has dosa. This is why it takes longer to become an anagami. People think they dislike lobha and dosa so much, but actually it's not true. they cannot live without lobha from day to day. In a day, there is more lobha than anything else. When one doesn't expect anything, such as any result or panna (wisdom), 'the great panna', one lives happily with the development of understanding very naturally, because one can see one's accumulations and one can see that one cannot have the things which have not been accumulated. ... Then a qu about disliking one's accumulations - so little kusala and so much akusala in a day. ... K. Sujin responded by saying that instead of seeing the deeply rooted lobha, the self doesn't like it again. When there's more understanding, one takes it easy. It doesn't matter what is arising, because it has arisen by conditions, completely arisen by conditions. We have the latent tendency for lobha, dosa and other akusala (unwholesome states). But if the akusala moment does not arise, how can one know that one still has it? So, it's good to know the truth of one's accumulations and this is the way to develop panna, because it can understand reality. ... Laughs and Qu about the elimination and eradication of defilements. ... Understanding is like the light. When there is light, there is less darkness, little by little. "We don't have to make the darkness disappear". It's not 'you' doing good deeds or becoming a better person. We must read all the words in the Suttanta, Vinaya AND Abhidhamma. When you just read the Suttanta, you think it's me who can have the gradual elimination of akusala by doing good deeds. But even at those moments, it's not you. "It's not you doing good deeds". Everyone understands about good and bad, but the Buddha pointed out the details much more, up to the Abhidhamma, not 'you' doing good deeds. People cling to results and want to have less and less akusala. When they do good deeds, they expect 'I'll be better or something good will happen for 'me''. We cannot just read some part of the Tipitaka and think it's enough. Without understanding realities, nama and rupa, it's 'me' again, even when we hear about moments of seeing and so on. Vijja (understanding) understands more and works its way to have more kusala, but it's not 'me'. Without vijja, it's avijja (ignorance) - doing good for 'me'. When one develops more understanding, one doesn't need to worry about whether there's more dana, sila or samatha, because vijja works its way. For example, when we give, there can be understanding of pleasant or indifferent feeling or even of conceit. By understanding, we can see that all dhammas are anatta, otherwise it's only in the book. "The function of panna is to detach." "No expectation at all." Metta, Sarah ======= 39217 From: kenhowardau Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 0:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Hi Howard, Andrew wrote: ---------------- > > [Description] looks like prescription. A mountain lake looks like > glare and hundreds of little ripples. But to the Ariyan who sees to > the lake bottom .... > ---------------- And you were singularly unimpressed: ------------ > Howard: > Oh, please. ------------ To me, the understanding of the Buddha's Dhamma as descriptive, not prescriptive, is sacrosanct. It is the best thing that ever happened to me. Your appraisal amounts to, "Oh hogwash!" and "Oh don't be so pathetic!" But I should be the last to object: I have said some uncomplimentary things about formal practices, and I know those practices are dear to you. In any case, I take no offence. You go on to imply that certain DSG people are teaching helplessness, hopelessness and the inefficacy of kamma. You have said as much many times before, and everyone concerned has denied it. So please, quote exactly where this has occurred, and let's look at it again. Kind regards, Ken H > ----------------------------------------- > Howard: > Oh, please. When the Buddha taught his followers to take specific > actions, which he most assuredly did, that was prescription, whether one is an > Ariyan or a worldling. Andrew, have you bought into the perspective that there is > nothing to do and nothing to be done? The perspective that all depends on > causes and conditions, but your volition and volitional actions are not *among* > those conditions? Where is the appeal in such helplessness and hopelessness? If > progress on the Buddhist path cannot be affected by our actions, then taking > refuge and "being a Buddhist" is utter nonsense. > ------------------------------------------- snip 39218 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 0:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Value of discussion (was evil thoughts) Hi Phil,(Hugo & KenO), I thought you made many excellent comments in yr post (39088) to Hugo (and Hugo, if this is beginning to sound like biased back-slapping for old friends, let me assure you that I loved your spaghetti and microscope posts and all the points you raise too;-)). --- plnao wrote: > > Phil: So how does sitting on the sidelines help them? Of course, as I > said > above, people get it, or they don't, so your > intervention might seem futile at times, but it can still be right > effort on > your part, and helpful for your own bhavana > even if it doesn't get through. All middle way, of course. .... S: I'm very glad you're no longer cursing those who burst in with other views than yours or Nina's or K.Sujin's - yes, I remember how protective you used to be, but we all have to consider and consider or hear and hear a lot. 'Never enough' as we're always reminded. I'm not sure about this 'people getting it or not business'. I think it's gradual for us all. Many of the points and qus we raised in India are ones we've been raising for yonks it seems. but 'never enough'!! And yes, if it's clear to us, how will staying on the sidelines help others? Very glad that as your computer crumbles, you're still in the centre of the ring. And Ken O, of course I agree with most of what you say and quote so well, especially anything extreme on anatta,(though, as you know I also like friendly greetings and smiles;-).You've been explaining many fine points beautifully imho. You mentioned the dosa at home and my last post is along the lines you've been discussing. I think we can also learn from K.Sujjin's patient responding to our foolish qus over and over without a hint of irritation or intolerance. 'Be the understanding peson' we're told and have metta for those around. Everyone prefers to hear a friendly word and see a little smile;-) No need to force it either way. I must say, we've smiled a lot over the smiling posts - mostly lobha, but then that's just natural;-).We're not so far on yet that we can't enjoy Htoo's little poem for example;-);-). Metta, Sarah ======= 39219 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 1:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What means 'no control' ? And band-aids Hi Joop, --- jwromeijn wrote: > Sarah: Anatta and no control simply means that whether or not we > apply the band-aid, which colour gets to be applied and whether it > will have any desired effect or not will depend on many, many factors. > Joop: I think the 'band-aid' is a usefull metaphore, I think I have > some, belonging to my culture and my (temporary) identity; natural > science as a way of understanding the conceptual reality is one of > them. ..... S: Have you read Vism ch x111 on World Cycles about how the world perishes etc? I think you have Vism, but for those who don't it can be found on line in Buddhism in Translation by Henry Clarke Warren Also, see the Agga~n~na Sutta: On Knowledge of Beginnings, DN27 Happy to discuss further. I think there are some posts on it in U.P. ??'Sasana,Decline of..' (Connie, can you remember?) On animals and lack of wisdom etc, see ch 11, Abhidhamma in Daily Life on 'Different types of Patisandhi citta'. On woeful planes like the animal plane, the patisandhi citta is akusala vipaka. No wholesome roots. No chance to develop panna. Many accounts of the woeful states in the suttas too. Metta, Sarah ======== 39220 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 1:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Metta for oneself translation question Dear Antony, Thanks for considering this area further with me. --- Antony Woods wrote: > I wouldn’t equate metta for oneself with covetousness. I thought that > if, > using the pun, you “mind your own mind’s business” (Nyanaponika) then > this > is metta for oneself without covetousness. Although greed means more > than > wanting the possessions of others. .... S:When we are concerned about our own happiness or peace of mind or experience another's friendlines, is there any metta at such times or is there attachment to oneself? I gave a quote about the development of metta and amity in a post to Phil (the band-aids one). This is the opposite state of feeling hostility towards others.Seeing others as friends and in a friendly manner. Impossible to 'step out' and view ourselves in such a way, I'm sure. .... > Dr Elizabeth Ashby wrote: “The commentators of old were much more > drastic. > Greed is "delight in one's own possessions."” > http://www.buddhanet.net/filelib/genbud/bodhi014.zip ... S: I haven't looked at the link - a bit rushed these days with the tape work. (btw, if you can listen to the recordings, go to Savatthi hotel garden discussion and Chris brings up just your Qs about metta). I don't know what 'drastic' means here. Lobha (greed or attachment) is delight in objects experienced through the senses and the conceptualising on account of them. So we read in the suttas, abhidhamma and commentaries about clinging to visible objects and so on. In other words, clinging to experiences and objects for ourselves, not for others. There is no lack of concern for oneself and one's experiences. The path is towards having less concern, not more, for oneself. Seeing the obsession for what it is. .... > S: If one thinks one should develop metta to > oneself, one will just develop more and more attachment and it will > bring > more and more problems. > > A: The word “should” seems important here. .... S: I agre. When one has this idea, I think it's a wrong practice in addition to the common ordinary attachment to self which is always being accumulated. This is why it's better to have no understanding of the Buddha's teaching than to be developing a wrong understanding which can really lead one into trouble. > > Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote: > > “This might appear to contradict what we said earlier, that metta is > free > from self-reference. The contradiction is only apparent, however, for in > > developing metta towards oneself one regards oneself objectively, as a > third > person. Further, the kind of love developed is not self-cherishing but a > > detached altruistic wish for one's own well-being.” > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/waytoend.html#n19 .... S: I think B.Bodhi is wrong on this point (as he knows!). Someone asked him about the quotes and I recall him agreeing that the quotes do not support this view he has. I think Christine wrote about this. You can ask her when she returns from the weekend. So it's a view that is contrary to the Buddha's words. .... > A friend wrote to me to wish all beings be happy, not all beings except > Antony Woods. .... S:Why not just wish all beings be happy and forget about Antony Woods for a moment? We can see the difference when we wish others well and when we wish ourselves well. .... > What did Munindra say about metta for oneself? I never met him but I > have > confidence in him. ... S:Munindra was someone who, conventionally speaking, was very 'sefless' or very concerned about the others' welfare in my experience. I don't recall him talking about himself or ever suggesting metta for oneself. But it's so long ago that I could be wrong. Actually, I don't remember coming across the idea of metta to oneself until quite recently and to be honest, it doesn't make any sense to me. How or what does it help to have an idea of metta to oneself, do you think? I hope you'll continue to discuss these points. Quote anything you find helpful. If you were to go back and follow the old metta thread in the archives, I think the comments of BB's were in a post of Christine's. He may have written them in a letter to another old teacher of hers. It's like a 'comfort blanket' in spite of the textual support which seems to give a lot of comfort, but actually makes the 'growing up' or development of understanding with detachment so much harder. Metta, Sarah ======== 39221 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 1:57am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 66 - Perception/Sa~n~naa (m) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.3 Perception(sa~n~naa)contd] ***** When we think of a concept such as a flower, we may take the flower for something which lasts. The ariyans, those who have attained enlightenment, also think of concepts but they do so without wrong view. When they recognize a flower, they do not take that moment of recognizing for self. Neither do they take the flower for something which lasts. So long as defilements have not been eradicated we are subject to rebirth, we have to experience objects through the senses and on account of these objects clinging arises. We tend to become obsessed by the objects we experience. We read in the Middle Length Sayings (I, no. l8, Discourse of the Honey Ball) about the origin of perceptions and obsessions and their ending. Mahå- Kaccana gave to the monks an explanation about what the Buddha had said in brief: *** …Visual consciousness, your reverences, arises because of eye and visual object; the meeting of the three is sensory impingement (phassa); feelings are because of sensory impingement; what one feels one perceives; what one perceives one reasons about; what one reasons about obsesses one; what obsesses one is the origin of the number of perceptions and obsessions which assail a man in regard to visual object cognisable by the eye, past, future, present… *** The same is said with regard to the other doorways. Is this not daily life? We are obsessed by all the objects which are experienced through the six doors, objects of the past, the present and the future. It is due to saññå that we remember what we saw, heard, smelled, tasted, touched and experienced through the mind-door. We attach so much importance to our recollections, we often are dreaming about them. However, also such moments can be object of awareness and thus the thinking can be known as only a kind of nåma which arises because of conditions, not self. When realities are known as they appear one at a time through the six doorways, one is on the way leading to the end of obsessions. ***** [Ch.3 Perception(sa~n~naa)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 39222 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 2:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] foundation web links Dear Nina, No trouble, but I'm not sure what is active. Kom told me at least a couple are not operating, so I've given him yr message and asked him to put a link in the links section for any which are ok. I believe a lot of work is being done on Dhammahome.com and it should be the current one, but I can't access it now. Metta, Sarah p.s Looking forward to your India series too! Also anusaya2. Rather than 'pertains to' which sounds a little unnatural, could you use 'refers to', 'applies to' or 'concerns'? Perhaps when you start posting them in small segments, it'll be easier to discuss in more detail. Appreciating all your posts and glad broadband is helping with all those posts rushing in;-). When we converted about a year ago only, it made a huge difference to our connection too. ======== --- nina wrote: > > Dear Sarah, > > In India I received addresses of the Foundation web. I am not sure about > the > exact addresses, and if possible, would you make links, please? I think > others may like to know too. > Buddha Dhamma Org. > Dhammahome.com > Dhammastudyandsupport.com > The last one is of the Bay area. > 39223 From: Ken O Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 2:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi Larry Sanna does not cognize an object, it marks an object, it is like a painter that paints the wall stroke by stroke but it does not direct it or know the full picture. It is citta function to know, to cognize an object and sanna function it to mark it. Moha does not arise all the time because moha and kusala cittas are exclusive events. They cannot arise at the same time. Moha is to blind us from knowing that "I" we have is a concept. It blinds us to see what is impermanent as permanent. It is lobha that keep loving the view of I but it is moha that prevent us seeing this I to love which in fact is nowhere to be found. When sanna is arise with panna, sanna is kusala if it is arise with moha, it is akusala. I am not the one who say this is right or this is wrong. It is Buddha who say it :). You are disputing with him not me :-) cheers Ken O 39224 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 3:58am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 151 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are other 4 lobha mula cittas. They all are upekkha cittas. That is they are accompanied by upekkha vedana. These 4 lobha cittas are 1. upekkha saha gatam ditthi gata sampayuttam asankharika citta This dhamma molecule is made up of a dhamma atom 'citta' and other atoms which are cetasikas. These cetasikas that arise in this particular citta are 7 universal cetasikas, 5 pakinnaka cetasikas after exclusion of piti, 4 akusala sadharana cetasikas, 1 lobha and 1 ditthi cetasika. So there are 7+5+4+1+1 = 18 cetasikas. When these 18 cetasikas are linked with a citta, that citta then becomes 'upekkha saha gatam ditthi gata sampayuttam asankharika citta. 2. upekkha saha gatam ditthi gata sampayuttam sasankharika citta This citta is accompanied by 18 cetasikas as described above along with 1 thina cetasika and 1 middha cetasika. So there are altogether 20 cetasikas arise with this upekkha citta. 3. upekkha saha gatam ditthi gata vippayuttam asankharika citta This citta is accompanied by 18 cetasikas. They are 7 universal cetasikas, 5 pakinnaka cetasika after exclusion of piti from 6 cetasikas, 4 akusala sadharana cetasikas, 1 lobha cetasika, and 1 mana cetasika. There is no ditthi as this citta is ditthi gata vippayutta citta. 4. upekkha saha gatam ditthi gata vippayuttam sasankharika citta This citta is accompanied by 20 cetasikas. They are 13 annasamana cetasikas, 4 akusala sadharana cetasikas, 1 lobha, 1 mana, 1 thina, and 1 middha cetasika. Citta itself is pure and its function is to know the object. But as other nama dhamma called cetasikas are also co-arising and co-working with it, citta becomes lobha citta, mana citta, piti citta, upekkha citta etc etc. Overall when these akusala cetasikas arise together, the citta becomes akusala citta. Akusala cittas cannot see realities. When you understand realities, at that particular time there is no akusala cittas. Again if there are akusala cittas, realities cannot be understood. Whoever understand dhamma and whoever does not understand dhamma, dhammas happen on their own accord and they will be ongoing according to niyama. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39225 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 4:20am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 152 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 2 dosa mula cittas. They are 1. domanassa saha gatam patigha sampayuttam asankharika citta 2. domanassa saha gatam patigha sampayuttam sasankharika citta Domanassa is made up of 'Do' or 'du' and 'mana + assa'. Do or du means 'bad' 'not good' 'dys-'etc and mana means 'mind' 'heart' 'soul'. So 'domanassa' means 'mental displeasure'. This is a kind of feeling a kind of vedana. This is the function of vedana cetasika. When there is displeasure, pleasure cannot arise. So there is no 'piti' at all in all dosa mula cittas. Saha means 'in conjunction with' 'together' 'being at the same time'. Gata means 'gone' 'gone away' 'arrive at' 'directed to'. So domanassa saha gatam means 'gone together with mental displeasure'. Patigha means 'striking'. It is dosa. As there is mental displeasure, there cannot be mental pleasure. In all dosa cittas, piti cetasika cannot arise at all. So there are 7 universal cetasikas, 5 pakinnaka cetasikas after exclusion of piti, 4 akusala sadharana cetasikas, and 1 dosa cetasika altogether 7 + 5 + 4 + 1 = 17 cetasikas arise with dosa mula citta. When issa arise there will be 18, and when macchariya arise there will be 18 and also when kukkucca cetasika arises there will be 18 cetasikas in those respective dosa mula cittas. But issa, macchariya, kukkucca cetasikas never arise together. And it is also possible that these all 3 dosa rooted cetasikas do not arise in dosa citta. Issa, maccharia, and kukkucca cetasikas are called aniyata yogi cetasikas. Yoga means 'connection' 'bond' 'attachment' 'yoke'. These 3 cetasikas do not always bind or yoke or attach or connect to citta that they can do so. This means there are dosa cittas that do not have any of jealousy, stinginess, and worry at all. When there is sasankharika dosa citta is accompanied by thina and middha cetasika. So there will be 19 cetasikas if they are pure dosa and 20 cetasikas if they are accompanied by one of 3 aniyata yogi cetasikas issa, macchariya, and kukkucca. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39226 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 4:31am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 153 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 12 akusala cittas. 8 lobha mula cittas and 2 dosa mula cittas have been discussed in the previous posts at molecular level. Among 12 akusala citta, there left 2 moha mula cittas. They are 1. upekkha saha gatam vicikiccha sampayutta citta 2. upekkha saha gatam uddhacca sampayutta citta There are 13 annasamana cetasikas. Among them chanda does not arise with moha cittas. There is no wish at all when there is doubt or suspicion or when there is restlessness or upset. In these 2 moha cittas, piti cannot arise. For the vicikiccha citta as it is indecisiveness, adhimokkha cetasika cannot arise as it is decision. So out of 13 cetasikas chanda, piti, and adhimokkha cannot arise in vicikiccha citta. So there are 10 annasamana cetasikas in vicikiccha citta. There also arise 4 akusala sadharana cetasikas namely moha, ahirika, anottappa, and uddhacca. So there are 10 + 4 = 14 cetasikas. Along with vicikiccha cetasika there are altogether 15 cetasikas arise in vicikiccha sampayutta citta. One atom of dhamma, citta is linked with 15 atoms of dhamma 15 cetasikas and this dhamma molecule becomes 'upekkha saha gatam vicikiccha sampayutta citta'. Again, in uddhacca sampayutta citta, there is no vicikiccha. So there are 14 cetasikas. But unlike vicikiccha sampayutta citta there is adhimokkha cetasika. So there also are 15 cetasikas in uddhacca sampayutta citta. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39227 From: plnao Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 4:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Band-aids, Control and Puppy dog Tails...(without much Pali for Joop!) Hi Sarah Thanks for the encouraging post. I'm very tired tonight after a long day and to tell the truth when I came to DSG was feeling overwhelmed by confusion re Dhamma, and irritation with all the back and forth thinking I have on it rather than the interest I usally have. Impatience and doubt. Natural enough, to be expected. In any case, your common-sense post brought me back from getting headaches from trying to figure things out. > We all have our own styles, preferences, methods or techniques for > managing our lives and indeed we often swap band-aids or recipes too. If > we think that we mustn't apply a band-aid or follow a recipe, it would be > indicative of a kind of wrong view of anatta meaning let pups or teenagers > or loud mouths run wild. I started to write some thoughts on this and found myself getting into the same thought patterns as yesterday. I won't get into that again tonight. > > Anatta and no control simply means that whether or not we apply the > band-aid, which colour gets to be applied and whether it will have any > desired effect or not will depend on many, many factors. Every thought, > intention, effort, act, speech, movement, like or dislike, as well as > every other mental and physical element, is dependent on numerous > conditions. The self, which only appears in our fantasies, never has > existed and never will exist to exert any say in the matter at all. This > is the illusion that only a Buddha could discover and teach us. Yes, so if I stop watching the news, it is not because there is a self that is controlling things. That's all that really matters. Right understanding came along and I knew quite clearly that it was time to do that. > So apply as many band-aids as you like (or rather, as conditions allow) > and develop awareness of the realities appearing at these times too, so > that gradually understanding can grow which knows the difference between > when there is and is not any awareness, regardless of whether it's a pink > florescent or a a spotty green band-aid (or no band-aid at all!) that is > being applied at the time. > > Gradually, by developing more understanding, the world of realities will > be clearly distinguished from the world of concepts and there won't be any > question about what actions should or should not be followed, who is > applying the remedies, whether band-aids have anything to do with the Path > or whether pups can really be trained. As Nina said, no controversies, no complications. I was thinking yesterday about how little doubt she has. Very encouraging. > > From Sammohavinodani (Dispeller), Classification of the Foundations of > Mindfulness, 1257f > *** > "Furthermore, six things lead to the abandoning of ill-will: 1) the > acquiring of the sign of amity, 2) devotion to the development of amity, > 3) reviewing ownership of kamma, 4) much reflection, 5) good friendship, > 6) suitable talk. > * Interesting. There is an Angutara Nikaya sutta that has it slightly differently, though it is referring to ill-will towards specific people rather than ill-will in general, I guess. Developing metta, karuna, equanimity, as well as ignoring the person and remember ownership of kamma. Personally, it seems to me that remembering kamma and equanimity are much more direct than feeling metta or compassion, in a way that supercede metta and compassion, but it will depend on conditions which method arises. It seems to me these days that ignoring the person is very helpful! If I don't know the news, the narrative dies out....a very commonsense approach. Sometimes it's not that complicated. Well, off to bed. Thanks again, Sarah. You're a very good Dhamma friend. My best to Jon. Metta, Phil 39228 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 5:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 153 ) Dear Htoo, Excellent detail and I appreciate any repetitions you give. Most helpful, but not easy even when I print them out. I'm a bit behind, so will try to catch up over the weekend and get back to you with qus/comments at the beg. of next week. Have a good weekend yourself and anumodana. Metta, Sarah p.s I get lost on atoms and molecules, so I skip those parts I'm afraid - not my accumulations!! ====== 39229 From: plnao Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 5:35am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi Hugo > > I join Ken O (and others, I imagine) in wanting to know if there is such a > > teaching, because- in my case at least- > > I would like like to try it if that were the case. But I won't until I know > > that it was the Buddha's teaching. > > Interesting approach. > > I like to try things (no matter who says it) and check if they are in > accord to what the Buddha taught. Yes, you're right. I sounded a bit fundamentalist there. But I am aware that practices that might not be good Dhamma can be seen as good Dhamma because they are pleasant or give the impression of progress on the path when they are in fact just throwing us way off. I don't mean to say the Bhante's smile is such a thing, or yours. > Also, I think there are a lot of documents in Pali (suttas?) that > hasn't been translated, so I think Phil you will have to wait quite a > looooong time to find out ALL that the Buddha taught. Well, I assume that a Bhante would be able to tell me where in the Buddha's teaching anything he teaches is found. Or isn't, if that's the case. As Howard said elsewhere, there are practices that are good Dhamma that were not literally taught by the Buddha, such as bowing to Buddha statues. But claiming easy access to the divine abides is something I will remain dubious of for some time to come, I imagine, as other people are dubious of claims of easy access to jhanas. Again, I have to admit that I didn't reflect deeply enough on the Bhante's post to be able to say for sure whether he was claiming easy access to metta. I apologized for that yesterday. > > I think smiles are much more valuable when they arise due to conditions, as > > they did in the > > story I told you about smiling after doing metta meditation, smiling without > > knowing it. > > If I had smiled intentionally it wouldn't have been such a valuable > > experience, in my > > opinion. > > I think, you, Ken and probably others are approaching my story the > wrong way, one proof is the fact that at least a couple of people > replied with a description on how a smile is produced, which has > NOTHING to do with my story. Sorry, Hugo, there were so many posts. I must have missed your story. I think I was just responding to a post in which KK was telling me that I should at least try the practice. > It is like if I tell story on how I painted my house to a different > color to "camouflage" it when it becomes dirty, and then people reply > describing the chemical composition of paint. I said I used the paint > to accomplish a task, does it matter what is the chemical composition > of the paint? Probably if I want the paint to stay put for 10 or 20 > years, but for the purpose I needed at that time, it worked fine. Ah, I see. This is a metaphor I use for intentional metta practice a lot. I realized I was painting the world in metta. Did it matter what the composition of the metta was? Yes, it did to me because what matters is anatta, and there was no understanding of anatta in the way I was applying metta. But as you say, it can help at the time. But doesn't it become a crutch that we lean on? Instead of getting at the root problem of why the house is burning (since that is the usual metaphor the BUddha uses with houses) don't we instead keep putting out the flames on the surface, even as the foundation is burning all the stronger in places we can't see? Don't we risk missing our rare opportunity of human birth in a time of Dhamma to make real but gradual progress? I have been applying camouglaging paint to cover up a deeper problem recently, so I am by no means denying the value. Just want to be careful about not getting hooked on pleasant remedies rather than using them when it is the wise time to use them. Oh, I'm just babbling, Hugh. Pretty sleepy tonight. > > I will read and learn about painting IF and WHEN it is needed. > > > Phil, have you ever dealt with 2 and 3 years old kids? > > If not, let me tell you they are excellent teachers in this regard. > When they are in a tantrum, if you talk to them in an angry voice, the > tantrum gets worse, not better. I know first-hand, more than a few > times a week, at home, at the mall, etc. I don't have kids, but I teach Japanese kids that are around 3. I find using a harsh voice every once in a while is very effective, because I am usually so nice that it scares the bejeezers out of them when mean Uncle Phil appears! But I really don't know about kids. > So, if my son gives a tantrum, and I am angry, only nasty things > happen that cause suffering to him, to me and to the rest of the > family. If there is a tool (e.g. smile to myself) that helps me > abandon the angry state, I think it is part of Right Effort to use it. Yes, this is a very good example of when common sense should prevail over "pure" Dhamma. It is good Dhamma if it helps us to be non-harmful, yes. There is a time for good, common-sense Dhamma and a time for stricter interpretations. More middle way. I'm sure you're a great Dad. > Did Buddha taught how to deal with 2 or 3 years old?........not that I > know of. So how will you deal with your 2 or 3 year old when he/she > comes? No in this lifetime. But I do have a charmingly short-tempered wife, and lots and lots of adult students that try my patience. I think the Buddha taught us how to deal with everyone, every situation when he taught the FOur Noble Truths. Coming to see the way people are pushed to behave the way they do by clinging to khandas, even in a basic intellectual way, can make us so much more patient with people, whether they are 2 or 92. Last night we went out for dinner and there were these little kids running through the restaurant, screaming. Just unbelievable. I didn't get irritated. Didn't think about the Noble Truths, but I have faith the reflection I've done on them in the past helps. > > I think of smiles as flowers that we can cultivate, but not place on our > > face by intention. > > There is a sutta in Anguttara Nikaya (III.91) in which the Buddha teaches us > > that we can plough > > the field, and water it, and do other preparatory work, but we cannot will > > the plants > > to grow. They grow due to conditions, beyond our control. That's the way I > > feel about smiles. > > mmmm....you are looking at the smile as a goal, my story specifically > says that the smile is a tool. No, I didn't mean that the smile is a goal. The state of mind that produces the smile is the goal in this case. We can't choose a state of mind, it rises due to conditions. I mean, that's for sure, obviously. I'm sure that your smiles are sincere, and are becoming more sincere the more and longer you smile. Of course, there are times when the smile is not sincere, when it arises from an angry citta. I'm sure you know those smiles. My wife does a good imitation of the way I smile when I'm pissed off. But it doesn't matter. Smile on, Hugo. And give your son a big smile for me! Metta, Phil 39230 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 5:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Lokuttara Satipatthana? Hi Steve, Nice to hear from you. op 02-12-2004 05:41 schreef seisen_au op seisen_@h...: > I was under the impression that > Satipatthana could be both mundane and lokuttara? > It has in this the couplets section of the Vibangha (p.269)> > (The four foundations of mindfulness) Are supramundane (lokuttara). N: Yes, The four foundations of mindfulness are among the factors leading to enlightenment and thus they can be lokiya and lokuttara. They have to be developed together with the other factors. There are three meanings of satipatthana:1 Sati of satipatthana,2 the objects of satipatthana (four foundations), and the way Buddha and his disciples went. That is, no attachment when people listen, no aversion when they turn away. See the Co. to the Vibhanga, the Dispeller of Delusion. p. 270. Thus, as is often the case dhammas can be considered under different aspects, different headings. Dispeller 351: Dispeller p. 354: We read in the Co to the Satipatthana sutta (Ven. Soma,) about the aspects of: only one Path, ekaayana maggo. I appreciated the post by Ven. Bhante Vimalaramsi. We read on p. 37 where it is refuted that one way is used in the sense of going to nibbaana once: < ...in this instruction the earlier part of the Path is intended to be presented, the preliminary part of the Way of Mindfulness proceeding in the four objects of contemplation is meant here, and not the supramundane Way of Mindfulness. And that preliminary part of the Path proceeds (for the aspirant) many times; or it may be said that there is many a going on it, by way of repetition of practice.> Nina. 39231 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 5:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] latent tendencies, accumulations. (Part I) Hi Larry, op 03-12-2004 00:50 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: are latent tendencies and accumulations exactly the same or different? I would say > accumulations can be either wholesome or unwholesome but latent > tendencies are always unwholesome N: This is correct. L: although bhavaraga (relishing the > process) is confined to jhana which is supposed to be wholesome. N: bhavaraaga: the latent tendency of craving for continued existence. Jhanacitta is kusala citta, and when there is craving there is no jhana-citta. bhavaraaga arises with lobha-mulacitta. > N: "Accumulation can be used in a wide sense: all our experiences are > accumulated, so that we remember them later on." > > L: What cetasika accumulates experiences and later remembers them? N: citta and cetasika accumulate. Sañña cetasika remembers. > L: "Are you saying kamma conditions > kamma by natural decisive support condition but not by kamma condition?" > > N: "For kamma to produce result not only kamma-condition is necessary > but > also natural decisive support condition." > > L: I'm not talking about kamma producing result. N: You are right, I oversaw that point, sorry. Thus, the answer is here: by natural decisive support condition. We should remember Mike's examples of habitual kamma. When we talk about kamma, and also about any other notion, we have to ask ourselves; is it citta, cetasika rupa or a concept? I leave out nibbaana. Kamma is cetana cetasika. L: You said javana is > conditioned by accumulations. What are these accumulations? They are the > accumulations of previous javana cittas and related factors such as > actions. However javana cannot condition javana by means of kamma > condition even though javana is kamma. Therefore, javana must condition > javana by natural decisive support condition. N: Yes, you are right. I would like to add this: the javanacittas are actively accumulating just now. Then they fall away, but they go on as accumulated tendencies, good or bad. Thus, I like to differentiate between active accumulating and what has been accumulated. Ayuhaana is used in connection with the accumulation of kamma that can produce result. Thus, I would like to be careful with the word accumulation. We have to see in which context it is used. There are other words. Expositor I, p.56, 57: apacaya: accumulations of kamma and the corruptions, that keep us in the cycle. P 84: cinaati: accumulate. Citta arranges itself in a series: word association of citta and cita. You found the word agglomeration, adding together (sampi.n.dana). We come to that later. > L: "Can panna undermine natural decisive support condition?" > > N: "No. It is the Law of Dhamma, Dhamma Niyama. This condition > comprises many factors." > > L: I disagree. If I am in the habit of becoming angry in a certain kind > of situation there is the possibility that panna could intervene, thus > disrupting the usual reaction. N: Quite so. And how is this conditioned? You have also accumulated pañña, not only anger. And here the accumulated pañña conditions the arising of kusala citta with pañña by way of natural decisive support condition. I like this example. We have to consider many factors here: good friends, listening to the Dhamma. Some conditioning factors stem from long ago. See my Expositor quote. It is interesting to see in our own life that sometimes akusala wins, sometimes kusala. L: This is the virtue of panna, to undermine > latent tendencies and even wholesome accumulations by disrupting natural > decisive support condition. N: Thus, the condition itself is not undermined, but the akusala has no chance when understanding was developed. That is why pañña is an important condition for all kinds of kusala. The kusala can take over. Nina. 39232 From: jwromeijn Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 7:17am Subject: [dsg] Re: What means 'no control' ? And band-aids. And latent tendencies Dear Nina, Sarah, and all Nina, you wrote: Dispositions are not permanent, they change because new tendencies are added to them when akusala citta arises, and also, when understanding is developed they wear away. I think it is the same discussion as Larry and you (and others) had under the title "latent tendencies, accumulations". What you say about "habit" I understand, but it is not special part of the Dhamma? To the concept "habit" belongs to the conventional psychology; it is an aspect of what is called "personality" in modern western psychology: a very conceptual, non-ultimate, word. The most important buddhist principles are for me: dukkha, anatta and anicca. And I test statements (even if they are made by you) to this principles. And of many statements (for example the Mahayana- expression 'Buddha-nature' I think: there is a core of atta-belief in it. So you have not convinced me. The difference between 'to fall away' and 'to wear away' is relative, not absolute; so perhaps we can agree on the statement: also dispositions are appearing and disappearing but not so quick as citta's, not so quick as rupa's, but on another timescale: of years or of hundred of years; and not 'automatically'. Joop: Sarah, I'm still not sure if I continue participating in this DSG. I converted myself to a Theravadin some years ago but I knew from that start that it was not for hundred percent and will not be so either; I'm trying to develop a 'modern buddhism'; on the level of conventional truth I prefer modern science, more than mythology. And it is difficult to discuss with (honorable) members who are hundred percent Theravadins and who don't doubt. My opinion is that what the Buddha said in the Sutta's has primary a soteriological meaning, not an ontological. And that the Buddha used the language, the mythology and the metaphores and the similes of his time and (North-Indian) culture. Sarah: Vism ch x111 on World Cycles about how the world perishes etc. Joop: I like this kind of stories. It's amazing that the time-scales used in it (an aeon has the same magnitude as a billion years), are But, to say it clear and simple: if Buddhagosa or (a reader) think this is meant literal than he is wrong ! Sarah: On animals and lack of wisdom etc, see ch 11, Abhidhamma in Daily Life on 'Different types of Patisandhi citta'. I have read this chapter (again), it's clear and I have no problem with it. But: Sarah: woeful planes like the animal plane. Joop: The question is: what means the term "plane"; because we had to combine the system of the 31 (or whatever number one prefers) planes with the empirical fact that on the planet Earth only animals (plane 2) and human beings (plane 5) are living. If the beings on all the other planes really (in ontological way) exist, is not important; important is the soteriological function of them. Somewhere some hundred thousand years ago thye first Patisandhi citta has been arising: the evolutionary leap from animal to human being. It's a pity Nina and Sarah don't react to my statement that according tot the evolutionary theory some hundred thousand years ago the human species evoluates from an animal-like species. It's more clear when you say: this theory is not correct. I think this theory is correct and what the Tipitaka and the commentaries say about history cannot or should not be taken literal. Metta Joop 39233 From: Hugo Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 7:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Value of discussion (was evil thoughts) Hello Andrew, On Wed, 01 Dec 2004 23:35:47 -0000, Andrew wrote: > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Hugo wrote: > > Hello Phil, > [snip] > > > > I am not saying that you should not help, I said that if the > > discussion becomes too much "I think", "I imagine", "I suspect", "I > am > > not sure", "I wish", "what if", then it is probably going too far > from > > the facts and getting into the imaginary. > > > > Sometimes a certain dose of imaginary thinking is useful, but watch > out. > > Hi Hugo > > Am I to conclude from the above that you experience some "thinking" > that is not "imaginary"? I am not sure if you are playing semantics over the words, but I will assume you are not, as I really don't like discussions over semantics, I have been involved in plenty of them and I think they do more harm than good. Now, to answer your question, that would be a wrong conclusion, please note that I said: "...if the discussion becomes too much...", emphasis on "IF" and "TOO MUCH". > Can you please elaborate? I meant that if during the course of a discussion none of the parties have direct knowledge of the topic at hand, and everybody is just guessing what is the right answer, the discussion should not continue any longer until the parties get some more knowledge, otherwise there are some risks: a) They convince each other of something that is Wrong View, but because all of them agreed after pondering on it they believe it is true. b) They fight each other and generate bad feeling, and probably even preventing from future discussions to take place, or to even see each other. Or, if there are future discussions, one of the angry parties will automatically (or subconsciously) take the side against whoever was his "enemy" in the last discussion. > There is a sutta in which the Buddha encourages us to say things > like "I think" and "I suspect" when we are not claiming direct > knowledge. In other words, he is warning us against the dangers of > imagining that we know realities that we don't. I couldn't parse your paragraph. A direct yes or no answer to the following question will clarify my doubts, is the Buddha encouraging us to say things like "I think" when we do not have direct knowledge or not? > How should we conduct a Dhamma discussion then, in your opinion? I have described it before, so I will summarize: 1) Good dose of first-hand facts, or at least second-hand facts 2) Good dose of good-will 3) Good dose of will to learn 4) Good dose of humility 5) Good sense on when to stop a specific topic because more facts are needed. 6) Good will to go an investigate what is not known as a fact Also, there are some things that are counterproductive to a discussion: 1) Will to show off 2) Will to impose views on others 3) Will to only speak and not hear 4) Will to only speak but not investigate 5) Will to discuss just for the sake of it > PS yes, I'm grumpy this morning. Will have to drive into town and > find someone to smile at me! [big smile] Don't depend on others, smile yourself to yourself. Now, if this helps: :-) :-D ;-) 8-D 8-) :-P 8-P Greetings, -- Hugo 39234 From: Bhante Vimalaramsi Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 6:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Dhamma Greetings Howard and Andrew, I think there is something missing and that something is the whole practice that the Buddha prescribed for meditation. In many, many suttas the Buddha said to practice generosity often. The act of giving in body speech and mind is an essential aspect of having a happy mind and therein lies the easy smile. In Asia where Buddhism is practiced in real ways instead of just intellectual ideas and debates, generosity is a very important aspect of life. Every morning the bhikkhus go out on alms round, the people there are very happy when they see the bhikkhus accepting food and other requisites. They become inspired to join in and they do this with a real sincere smile. Too many people in the West think that the end of suffering is to study, talk and practice formal meditation, but this is not following the way they do things in Asia. Generosity can and is practiced in body, helping others in real physical ways, like showing others a smile, or helping others to do things that need to be done. A common expression in Asia is "many hands make the work lighter". Generosity in speech means to say things that make others smile, using speech as a tool to help change a friends frown into a smile. For example, a the food store while waiting in line you notice that the cashier is having a rough time with some customers, when you get up to purchase whatever, you can say something to help the cashier to smile and relax. Generosity in mind means focusing one's mind on wishing others happiness, while waiting in line at the food store. Otherwise mind takes off and has a real chance to get involved with unwholesome thoughts and ideas. The idea to just watch whatever arises and forget mindfulness is a cause of a very dry type of practice, that takes a long time to develop ergo, the idea that it may take many lifetimes to accomplish spiritual advancement. Without the practice of generosity in body, speech and mind, the Buddha's teaching are lost in a sea of intellectualizing, and theory. The Buddha was a very practical teacher, he taught that it is necessary for everyone to be generous as much as possible daily and to do this with a happy mind. As KK put it what we think and ponder on, that is the inclination of one's mind. So thinking kind loving thoughts leads to more kind loving thoughts. Kind loving actions leads to more kind loving actions. Kind loving speech leads to more kind loving speech. And this is only the first step to be practiced many times during the day, when one is serious about the Buddha's path. If one must be serious, be seriously happy and give that happiness away as much as possible. The next step in the Buddha's teachings is keeping and following the 5 precepts. This leads to a tranquil mind that is free from remorse and anxiety. And only then to practice sitting in meditation. It is time to take the Buddha's teachings out of the intellectual and reinstate it into the practical. That naturally leads to more smiles that are sincere and a person who practices this, instead of talking about it, can know for themselves through direct knowledge what this teaching is all about. Maha-Metta always Bhante Vimalaramsi 39235 From: Bhante Vimalaramsi Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 7:05am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Dhamma Greetings Ken O, With your understanding and belief system this may be true. And is it following what the Buddha's intentions are? When Hugo stated: "Kalamas, don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, "This contemplative is our teacher." When you know for yourselves that, "These qualities are unskillful; these qualities are blameworthy; these qualities are criticized by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to harm & to suffering" -- then you should abandon them..." [...] "...Now, Kalamas, don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, "This contemplative is our teacher." When you know for yourselves that, "These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness" -- then you should enter & remain in them. Are you following what is said by the letter or intention? To be too literal leads one's mind to rigidity and harshness. Be ware of the critical mind that places the letter of the suttas above the intention. Maha-Metta always Bhante Vimalaramsi PS. The rest of the Kalama Sutta deals with the practice of the Brahma Viharas and this definitely deals with happiness and smiling. Don't you agree? 39236 From: Ken O Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 8:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What means 'no control' ? And band-aids. And latent tendencies Hi Joop > To the concept "habit" belongs to the conventional psychology; it > is an aspect of what is called "personality" in modern western > psychology: a very conceptual, non-ultimate, word. > > The most important buddhist principles are for me: dukkha, anatta > and anicca. And I test statements (even if they are made by you) to > this principles. And of many statements (for example the Mahayana- > expression 'Buddha-nature' I think: there is a core of > atta-belief in it. So you have not convinced me. k: Accumulations may not be a good word, we can use the taints, the fermentations or the underlying tendecies. J: The difference between 'to fall away' and 'to wear away' is relative, not absolute; so perhaps we can agree on the statement: also dispositions are appearing and disappearing but not so quick as citta's, not so quick as rupa's, but on another timescale: of years or of hundred of years; and not 'automatically'. k; Cittas rise and falls like a monkey moving from branches to branches, there is no relative about it. Ideation that stays in our mind because of continuously sucession of such cittas that make this seem "longer" which in fact this is not the case. All cittas that arise must fall away, but disposition can be longer that is because we are being "blind" by ignorance of not able to see the stream of succession of cittas that make us to believe it is longer. > Joop: Sarah, I'm still not sure if I continue participating in this > DSG. I converted myself to a Theravadin some years ago but I knew > from that start that it was not for hundred percent and will not be > so either; I'm trying to develop a 'modern buddhism'; on the level > of conventional truth I prefer modern science, more than mythology. > And it is difficult to discuss with (honorable) members who are hundred percent Theravadins and who don't doubt. k: We have faith in the teachings because we have investigate over and over and over again for unteen times and the conclusion we have is still that it has yet fail us or doubt them in anyway. All convictions to go on the path must start with faith. If everyone keep doubting them and believe what they think is correct, then the dhamma of the teachings will be changed and changed and the end, what has become of the dhamma will not be what is being taught by the Buddha. Teachings of Buddhism is not evolution, do you prefer to join a religion that always evolve its core values. J: It's a pity Nina and Sarah don't react to my statement that > according tot the evolutionary theory some hundred thousand years ago the human species evoluates from an animal-like species. It's more clear when you say: this theory is not correct. I think this theory is correct and what the Tipitaka and the commentaries say about history cannot or should not be taken literal. k: Definitely to me human is evolved from animal and we share many similarities, but one thing make us apart from animals is that we can develop panna, our kusala roots are stronger and not dull as animal. I dont think I have seen Buddha rejected evolution in those texts I have seen. Where does the distinction arise during this evolution does not matter anymore. Ken O 39237 From: Bhante Vimalaramsi Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 7:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Value of discussion (was evil thoughts) Dhamma Greetings Sarah, By reading so much about lobha when trying to pull up wholesome states of mind is a mistake. Chanda is a wholesome form of desire and gets forgotten about. If one is pulling up a smile this leads to an uplifted mind and doesn't have anything to do with the unwholesome lobha. Chanda is pointing one's mind to the direction of liberation, so it is a wholesome direction even if one has desire in their mind because of the direction one intends to attain. Maha-Metta always Bhante Vimalaramsi 39238 From: Hugo Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 9:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 09:42:29 -0500, Bhante Vimalaramsi wrote: > It is time to take the Buddha's teachings out of the intellectual and > reinstate it into the practical. That naturally leads to more smiles that > are sincere and a person who practices this, instead of talking about it, > can know for themselves through direct knowledge what this teaching is > all about. Thanks Bhante, your words made a smile arise on me. :-) -- Hugo 39239 From: ashkenn2k Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 9:08am Subject: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi Bhante, I did not answer Hugo, because these kind of argument are for those who wish to justify themselves when they cannot find sutta evidence to support their dicussion. If you can find a single sentence in the suttas that say smile is a method taught by Buddha and quote the source, I would have accept it when it is first said. If the four immeasurables are to be supported by using smiles as described in the suttas or anywhere in the ancient texts, I would have accepted what you have said. I will give you a comprehensive reply latter on as I am not at home when writing this. Be assure, it will not contained any commentaries or Abhidhamma as I am confident that the sutta itself is good enough. That is how much faith I have in the dhamma even though I have not read all the Nikayas. I not here to defend my point of view because there is nothing in it for me to defend for. I am here to defend the anicent path so that it can be preserved unchanged for the next 2,500 years. I am here to defend the ancient path so that others in the future generations can benefit that these texts are not changed, not even a single word. I am fundamentalist and I know that the anicent path is worth dying for. I dont even know Pali yet I have unshakeable faith in them. Ken O 39240 From: Hugo Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 9:13am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 05:56:59 +0000 (GMT), Ken O wrote: > k: Hugo, do you have the SN series in hard copy. Sorry for asking, but does SN stands for.........? Sutta Nikaya? If that's the question, then the answer is no, I don't have them, I am budgeting to get them next year. > Read the portion where Buddha talks in D.O where it says on the part, oneself and others. > These are very indicative statement on why sometimes > purposedly actions can be a hindrance rather than beneficial. Thanks for the recommendation, I will read them (along with the sutta you mentioned in a previous post: Kakacuupamasutta), I just need to figure it out when.... :-) -- Hugo 39241 From: Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 4:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Hi, Ken - In a message dated 12/3/04 3:19:54 AM Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@y... writes: > To me, the understanding of the Buddha's Dhamma as descriptive, not > prescriptive, is sacrosanct. It is the best thing that ever happened > to me. Your appraisal amounts to, "Oh hogwash!" and "Oh don't be so > pathetic!" ------------------------------------------ Howard: The statement "Oh, please" certainly does indicate strong disagreement. But as for your final quote, I would prefer that you didn't put nasty words in my mouth. As for what you find to be sacrosanct, you are, of course, welcome to that. I'm happy for you that you have found a perspective that is helpful to you and provides you with a means of grasping the Dhamma. I understand that. My "phenomenalism" serves me in a similar way. Of course, we should each realize that we may well be in error. ---------------------------------------- > > But I should be the last to object: I have said some uncomplimentary > things about formal practices, and I know those practices are dear > to you. In any case, I take no offence. > ----------------------------------------- Howard: That's good. :-) Likewise, though I think the "no-formal-practice" perspective is off the mark, I have not taken offense at criticisms made of formal practice. ----------------------------------------- > > You go on to imply that certain DSG people are teaching > helplessness, hopelessness and the inefficacy of kamma. You have > said as much many times before, and everyone concerned has denied > it. So please, quote exactly where this has occurred, and let's look > at it again. ----------------------------------------- Howard: I've pointed this out, in specific contexts many times, as you say. I am unwilling at this point to scour the archives for references. If you do not think that the view that there is no practice to be willfully done, and none that *can* be so done, is not a view of helplessness and hopelessness, then simply dismiss my perspective as nonsense. That is certainly your prerogative. ======================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39242 From: Hugo Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 9:27am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Dear Phil, On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 22:35:25 +0900, plnao wrote: > Sorry, Hugo, there were so many posts. I must have missed your story. > I think I was just responding to a post in which KK was telling me > that I should at least try the practice. Yes, I noticed the confusion. Part of it is that KK talks about "smiling to others", while I was talking about "smiling to yourself". > > It is like if I tell story on how I painted my house to a different > > color to "camouflage" it when it becomes dirty, and then people reply > > describing the chemical composition of paint. I said I used the paint > > to accomplish a task, does it matter what is the chemical composition > > of the paint? Probably if I want the paint to stay put for 10 or 20 > > years, but for the purpose I needed at that time, it worked fine. > > Ah, I see. This is a metaphor I use for intentional metta practice a lot. > I realized I was painting the world in metta. Did it matter what the > composition of the metta was? LOL, more confusion, no I was talking about when Htoo and I think Ken replied with a description on how a smile is generated. But let's leave it at that, the thread has gone too long already. > I don't have kids, but I teach Japanese kids that are around 3. Ah!!!!, no, that's not the same!!! Kids know that teachers should be approached in some way and parents in another!!! Also, teacher deal with them from 8-13 (choose your timing and days), parents...... 24x7. > I find > using a harsh voice every once in a while is very effective, With your children sometimes works, but it is not really a good technique if you want long term results. Once I told my father that I wanted that my kids do what I tell them to do not because they are afraid of me, but because they admire, love and respect me.....I am working on that.....it is tough, though. On the other hand, being a Buddhist, helps a lot! > More middle way. I'm sure you're a great Dad. I only wish....... > Last night we went out for dinner and there were these little kids > running through the restaurant, screaming. Just unbelievable. I didn't get > irritated. That's one of the funny things, when I hear OTHER's kids screaming and throwing tantrums, I feel compassion for the fathers, but when my kids do that, that's different, I feel stress. And the reason is that Wrong View of MY kids versus the OTHER's kids.....I am working on that, plus there is also that sometimes conscious, and sometimes unconscious feeling of "what will others say?". Anyway, I think I am deviating from the topic of the thread. > We can't choose a state of mind, it rises due to > conditions. My experience is that I can create the conditions for certain state of mind to arise, or I can dissassemble the conditions for certain state of mind to not arise. Of course I am not successful 100% of the time, but I have been successful enough times to be convinced that what I do, effectively affects my state of mind. > Smile on, Hugo. And give your son a big smile for me! :-) Thanks, -- Hugo 39243 From: Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 4:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi, Ken (and Larry) - In a message dated 12/3/04 5:43:52 AM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: > > Sanna does not cognize an object, it marks an object, it is like a > painter that paints the wall stroke by stroke but it does not direct > it or know the full picture. It is citta function to know, to > cognize an object and sanna function it to mark it. > ========================= My understanding is that sa~n~na has both a marking function and a (later) recognition function. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39244 From: Hugo Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 9:45am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) To All, On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 10:05:46 -0500, Bhante Vimalaramsi wrote: > Are you following what is said by the letter or intention? To be too > literal leads one's mind to rigidity and harshness. Also, if we consider the source of the Tipitaka and how it has been maintained and translated. And after seeing how people (including Bhante Vimalaramsi) has pointed out differences or inaccuracies in translations. Also, let's not forget the cultural and differences in languages, if you know more than one language it is easy to see how difficult is to translate complex documents from one to the other. Now if we consider that we can't find any Pali native speakers whom to ask, and even if there were, it is at least 2500 years later. I have to believe that somewhere, sometime, somebody has made at least ONE mistake. And that mistake if followed by the letter might lead you to some wrong path, but if you read everything and then find the key parts and significance, that's easier to find the right path. Ah, and let's not forget the printing errors!! Months ago (maybe a year) I made a similar comment but about the Christian Bible (same thing, the way it was written, maintained, copied, translated, etc.) when talking with a couple of friends who say that thou shall live as it is explicitely written in the Bible (even without considering cultural differences, time differences and practices). Just a few days after that discussion, I consulted the Bible for something (I don't remember what) and there, I found ONE mistake!!!, it seems it was a printing mistake, they changed one letter, it said: Hombra instead of Hombre (hombre means 'man' in Spanish) which might not be that bad, and it is easy to spot, but can you imagine how many words can change their meaning by altering just one word? And in any case, that simple case breaks the statement that the Bible is free from errors. Also, when I first started the journey into Buddhism, I read about a monk (Can't remember his name) in a website set up by some of his students who took care of him during his last days at the hospital. They said that sometimes somebody would ask him why he didn't quote anything from the Tipitaka when giving Dhamma talks. His reply amazed me because it matched almost exactly what I said before about the possibility of an error in the scriptures, so he said he taught what he knew by direct experience, because that he could explain. Greetings, -- Hugo 39245 From: Hugo Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 9:48am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:45:02 -0500, Hugo wrote: > days after that discussion, I consulted the Bible for something (I > don't remember what) and there, I found ONE mistake!!!, it seems it > was a printing mistake, they changed one letter, it said: Hombra > instead of Hombre (hombre means 'man' in Spanish) which might not be > that bad, and it is easy to spot, but can you imagine how many words > can change their meaning by altering just one word? Oops, the question should have been: Can you imagine how many words can change their meaning by altering just one letter? Otherwise it is too stupid and easy to answer. ;-P Also, "Hombra" doesn't exist as far as I know in the Spanish language that's why it is easy to spot the error. -- Hugo 39246 From: ashkenn2k Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 9:54am Subject: Re: Sanna/Ken O Hi Howard You are right to say that sanna is marking or recognition. <> I was trying to say <> << There are moments of hearing and the saññå which accompanies hearing-consciousness merely perceives the sound, it does not know the meaning of what is said. When we understand the meaning of what has been said there are cittas which experience concepts and the saññå which accompanies those cittas remembers and `marks' a concept.>> Should have used the cetasikas by Nina Ken O 39247 From: Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 4:52am Subject: Kindness in Word, Speech, and Deed Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's ... Hi, Bhante (and Rob M, Ken O, and all) - In a message dated 12/3/04 10:52:22 AM Eastern Standard Time, bhantevimalaramsi@j... writes: > > Dhamma Greetings Howard and Andrew, > > I think there is something missing and that something is the whole > practice that the Buddha prescribed for meditation. In many, many suttas > the Buddha said to practice generosity often. The act of giving in body > speech and mind is an essential aspect of having a happy mind and therein > lies the easy smile. > > In Asia where Buddhism is practiced in real ways instead of just > intellectual ideas and debates, generosity is a very important aspect of > life. Every morning the bhikkhus go out on alms round, the people there > are very happy when they see the bhikkhus accepting food and other > requisites. They become inspired to join in and they do this with a real > sincere smile. > > Too many people in the West think that the end of suffering is to study, > talk and practice formal meditation, but this is not following the way > they do things in Asia. Generosity can and is practiced in body, helping > others in real physical ways, like showing others a smile, or helping > others to do things that need to be done. A common expression in Asia is > "many hands make the work lighter". > > Generosity in speech means to say things that make others smile, using > speech as a tool to help change a friends frown into a smile. For > example, a the food store while waiting in line you notice that the > cashier is having a rough time with some customers, when you get up to > purchase whatever, you can say something to help the cashier to smile and > relax. > > Generosity in mind means focusing one's mind on wishing others happiness, > while waiting in line at the food store. Otherwise mind takes off and has > a real chance to get involved with unwholesome thoughts and ideas. The > idea to just watch whatever arises and forget mindfulness is a cause of a > very dry type of practice, that takes a long time to develop ergo, the > idea that it may take many lifetimes to accomplish spiritual advancement. > > Without the practice of generosity in body, speech and mind, the Buddha's > teaching are lost in a sea of intellectualizing, and theory. The Buddha > was a very practical teacher, he taught that it is necessary for everyone > to be generous as much as possible daily and to do this with a happy > mind. As KK put it what we think and ponder on, that is the inclination > of one's mind. So thinking kind loving thoughts leads to more kind loving > thoughts. Kind loving actions leads to more kind loving actions. Kind > loving speech leads to more kind loving speech. > -------------------------------------------- Howard: I strongly agree with you, Bhante, about the great importance of kindness in word, speech, and deed. Actually, it turns out that there is an unusual amount of this to be founbd among the members of this particular list (regardless of how idiosyncratic you and I may find some perspectives expressed here at times! ;-) I think particularly of someone like Rob Moult, just as an example, who lives by this. In that regard, and in relation to the food store example you give above, it *may* have been Rob who gave a similar example of a practice of his, a willed practice, BTW, Ken ;-), that consist of always greeting highway toll takers with a smile and a good word - actions that *prompt* happy responses. Bob is only one example. Good will and its practical expression is very prominent among the DSG membership. In fact, it happens that I've seen more of such here than on some other ostensibly more practice-oriented lists. So - go know!! ;-)) ------------------------------------------ > > And this is only the first step to be practiced many times during the > day, when one is serious about the Buddha's path. If one must be serious, > be seriously happy and give that happiness away as much as possible. > > The next step in the Buddha's teachings is keeping and following the 5 > precepts. This leads to a tranquil mind that is free from remorse and > anxiety. And only then to practice sitting in meditation. > > It is time to take the Buddha's teachings out of the intellectual and > reinstate it into the practical. That naturally leads to more smiles that > are sincere and a person who practices this, instead of talking about it, > can know for themselves through direct knowledge what this teaching is > all about. > > Maha-Metta > always > Bhante Vimalaramsi > ======================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39248 From: ashkenn2k Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 9:56am Subject: Re: Sanna/Ken O Hi Howard Forget to say thanks for correcting me on Sanna. Ken O 39249 From: ashkenn2k Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 10:18am Subject: Kindness in Word, Speech, and Deed Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's ... Hi Howard and Bhante, There is difference between a smile conditioned by kusala behaviour and using a smile to conditioned a kusala behaviour. When people see Bhikkhu and smile at them, it is because it is conditioned by good will. Just like in ancient times, when some people see Buddha, they felt joyous. If they purposedly have to smile at them, then it is smile that conditioned kusala behaviour. There is a world of difference between them. Sorry geneorsity in speech does not mean make others smile. Please see Prince Abaya sutta what is meant by generosity in speech. And first thing is learning dhamma is about understanding suffering and when we understand that, everything will fall in place. You will naturally be more compassionate, more polite, more kindness and more joyous and not the other way round, that is why Buddha say Arahant will never do any more akusala behaviour because there is direct understanding of suffering, that is why Arahants are also compassion because of this. It is not the other way round as this can be conditioned by akusala cittas. Ken O 39250 From: Hugo Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 10:22am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hello Ken, On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 17:08:56 -0000, ashkenn2k wrote: > I not here to defend my point of view because there is nothing in it > for me to defend for. I am here to defend the anicent path so that > it can be preserved unchanged for the next 2,500 years. I am here to > defend the ancient path so that others in the future generations can > benefit that these texts are not changed, not even a single word. I > am fundamentalist and I know that the anicent path is worth dying for. > I dont even know Pali yet I have unshakeable faith in them. That sounds in the exact same spirit as those friends of mine that I talked about in my last post (different religion, same spirit). Nowadays we are still good friends, but we don't talk religion anymore. I hope that you and I can keep being good "cyberfriends" and I hope you are still willing to help me if I have questions about Abhidhamma, and other topics you know. I don't know what I can offer to you, though. mmmm...maybe I can offer this to you from the Dhammapada: Sabbe sankhara anicca. All conditioned things are impermanent. The Path is conditioned, thus it is impermanent, don't be attached to it or you will suffer. Or you can take it with a grain of salt and be happy that you know what the result will be, i.e. you will lose the battle but there will be a jolly good fellow coming to re-establish it, according to: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/bfaq.html#maitreya Or you can be happy because during this lifetime the path will remain, therefore you won the battle! Anyway, it is up to you to decide how you want to feel about this. Also, if you want to defend that the texts are not changed even one word, I would suggest that you learn Pali, review all the existing translations and correct them if necessary, for a lot of people (including myself) the English translations are "The Book" because our inability to read Pali. Greetings, -- Hugo 39251 From: Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 5:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sanna/Ken O Hi, Ken - In a message dated 12/3/04 1:01:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: > Hi Howard > > Forget to say thanks for correcting me on Sanna. > > > Ken O > ========================== No problem! Thanks very much for your kindness in writing back. :-) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39252 From: Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 5:26am Subject: Re: Kindness in Word, Speech, and Deed Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's ... Hi, Rob M - A typo correction. In a message dated 12/3/04 1:03:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: > Bob is only one example. > ================== I meant "Rob"! ;-) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39253 From: Hugo Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 10:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] India discussions - audio version Hello Sarah, On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 05:24:45 +0000 (GMT), sarah abbott wrote: > As promised, the recordings of discussions from our recent trip to India Do they include some of the interactions with the hotel clerks? ;-) -- Hugo 39254 From: Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 5:46am Subject: Re: Kindness in Word, Speech, and Deed Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's ... Hi, Ken (and Bhante) - Although your post is a direct reply to my post entitled "Kindness in Word, Speech, and Deed," it isn't a response to the content of my post, but instead is just further expression of your position with respect to previously discussed material. My post was about kindness and its prominent presence on DSG. With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/3/04 1:30:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: > Hi Howard and Bhante, > > There is difference between a smile conditioned by kusala behaviour > and using a smile to conditioned a kusala behaviour. When people see > Bhikkhu and smile at them, it is because it is conditioned by good > will. Just like in ancient times, when some people see Buddha, they > felt joyous. If they purposedly have to smile at them, then it is > smile that conditioned kusala behaviour. There is a world of > difference between them. > > Sorry geneorsity in speech does not mean make others smile. Please > see Prince Abaya sutta what is meant by generosity in speech. > > And first thing is learning dhamma is about understanding suffering > and when we understand that, everything will fall in place. You will > naturally be more compassionate, more polite, more kindness and more > joyous and not the other way round, that is why Buddha say Arahant > will never do any more akusala behaviour because there is direct > understanding of suffering, that is why Arahants are also compassion > because of this. It is not the other way round as this can be > conditioned by akusala cittas. > > > Ken O > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39255 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 0:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: AN III - 100 mental misconduct vs. thoughts of ill-will Dear Sarah, thank you very much. I especially find the quote below helpful. We know we have lobha, and at the same time there is dislike of it, a thought: I should not have akusala. Very good if you now and then quote. Nina op 03-12-2004 09:11 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...: > Then a qu about disliking one's accumulations - so little kusala and so > much akusala in a day. > ... > K. Sujin responded by saying that instead of seeing the deeply rooted > lobha, the self doesn't like it again. When there's more understanding, > one takes it easy. It doesn't matter what is arising, because it has > arisen by conditions, completely arisen by conditions. We have the latent > tendency for lobha, dosa and other akusala (unwholesome states). But if > the akusala moment does not arise, how can one know that one still has it? > So, it's good to know the truth of one's accumulations and this is the > way to develop panna, because it can understand reality. 39256 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 0:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: evolution. Dear Joop, op 03-12-2004 16:17 schreef jwromeijn op jwromeijn@y...: > It's a pity Nina and Sarah don't react to my statement that according > tot the evolutionary theory some hundred thousand years ago the human > species evoluates from an animal-like species. It's more clear when > you say: this theory is not correct. I think this theory is correct > and what the Tipitaka and the commentaries say about history cannot > or should not be taken literal. N: The Tipitaka and commentaries do not have as purpose science, evolution theories or history. That is why these matters do not play a part in the teachings. The teachings touch on another aspect. The goal is detachment from the wrongt view of self and eradication of all defilements. So, we can find each other with regard to the three characteristics you mentioned. You find these important. Why are they important? They lead to detachment. They are valid for all beings at all times. No need for a contraversy on science, people have different ideas about it. It really is no problem how you think about evolution. And do discuss it if you like. I hope you will not leave! Nina. 39257 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 0:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Metta for oneself translation question Dear Sarah, That was my impression when I met him in Bodhgaya and later on once in the Hague. He would not impose his ideas on others, he was openminded. Nina. op 03-12-2004 10:53 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...: > :Munindra was someone who, conventionally speaking, was very 'sefless' or > very concerned about the others' welfare in my experience. I don't recall > him talking about himself or ever suggesting metta for oneself. 39258 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 0:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] foundation web links Dear Sarah, op 03-12-2004 11:36 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...: > Also anusaya2. Rather than 'pertains to' which sounds a little unnatural, > could you use 'refers to', 'applies to' or 'concerns'? Perhaps when you > start posting them in small segments, it'll be easier to discuss in more > detail. N: Yes, that may be better, I was thinking today. I thought : inheres in is inherent in. Originally I had: adheres to. Kamaraga also inheres in feeling, sannña etc. or: what you say: concerns feeling? We ordered now a mini disc for Lodewijk to read the Perfections for the foundation web. Similar to Jon's but a newer model. Since I cannot upload (no sound on computer) we take it to Thailand next time ourselves. I had no time to look at dsg web links, but shall visit now all these sites. Nina. 39259 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 1:33pm Subject: Re: AN III - 100 mental misconduct vs. thoughts of ill-will --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Sarah, > thank you very much. I especially find the quote below helpful. We know we > have lobha, and at the same time there is dislike of it, a thought: I should > not have akusala. > Very good if you now and then quote. > Nina > op 03-12-2004 09:11 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...: > > > Then a qu about disliking one's accumulations - so little kusala and so > > much akusala in a day. > > ... > > K. Sujin responded by saying that instead of seeing the deeply rooted > > lobha, the self doesn't like it again. When there's more understanding, > > one takes it easy. It doesn't matter what is arising, because it has > > arisen by conditions, completely arisen by conditions. We have the latent > > tendency for lobha, dosa and other akusala (unwholesome states). But if > > the akusala moment does not arise, how can one know that one still has it? > > So, it's good to know the truth of one's accumulations and this is the > > way to develop panna, because it can understand reality. Friends Sarah and Nina, I am just jumping into this thread and I haven't followed the entire thread, but I have a question: Is this how the Buddha said one should view the defilements? This seems to be a type of "if it feels good, do it" philosophy. I'm not saying that hating one's defilements is productive (I don't think it is), but I also don't think that one should accept them. What do you think? Metta, James 39260 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 2:02pm Subject: Re: evolution. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Joop, > > op 03-12-2004 16:17 schreef jwromeijn op jwromeijn@y...: > > > It's a pity Nina and Sarah don't react to my statement that according > > tot the evolutionary theory some hundred thousand years ago the human > > species evoluates from an animal-like species. It's more clear when > > you say: this theory is not correct. I think this theory is correct > > and what the Tipitaka and the commentaries say about history cannot > > or should not be taken literal. > N: The Tipitaka and commentaries do not have as purpose science, evolution > theories or history. That is why these matters do not play a part in the > teachings. The teachings touch on another aspect. The goal is detachment > from the wrongt view of self and eradication of all defilements. So, we can > find each other with regard to the three characteristics you mentioned. You > find these important. Why are they important? They lead to detachment. They > are valid for all beings at all times. > No need for a contraversy on science, people have different ideas about it. > It really is no problem how you think about evolution. And do discuss it if > you like. I hope you will not leave! > Nina. Friend Nina (and Joop), I remember a sutta that states something to the effect that the planet used to be inhabited by entities of light but then they ate the sludge of the oceans and gained material form (as humans?). I can't find that sutta now (I'm kinda tired tonight) but perhaps someone else here can identify the sutta I am referring to. Anyway, it does seem to speak to evolution. However, I read some sources which question the authenticity of that sutta as Buddha word, and I have my doubts also. Metta, James 39261 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 2:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] India discussions - audio version Oh Hugo (& Chris), You're a real wag! --- Hugo wrote: > > Hello Sarah, > > On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 05:24:45 +0000 (GMT), sarah abbott > wrote: > > As promised, the recordings of discussions from our recent trip to > India > > Do they include some of the interactions with the hotel clerks? > > ;-) > .... S: I think you'll have to ask Chris next time to go armed with her own tape-recorder to catch these alternative discussions she has;-). She oould then write a book on them.... Metta, Sarah p.s keep an eye out for 'zany' in U.P. currently being updated anytime you feel you need to rebel from straight dhamma;-) ================================================================== 39262 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 2:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 153 ) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Dear Htoo, > > Excellent detail and I appreciate any repetitions you give. Most helpful, > but not easy even when I print them out. I'm a bit behind, so will try to > catch up over the weekend and get back to you with qus/comments at the > beg. of next week. > > Have a good weekend yourself and anumodana. > > Metta, > > Sarah > p.s I get lost on atoms and molecules, so I skip those parts I'm afraid - > not my accumulations!! > ====== ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Sarah, Thanks. There are no atoms even in science. But there are molecules. When atoms are intended to study, molecules have to be treated specially. In dhammas, dhamma molecules are treated with 'panna' to separate out dhamma atoms. There is no single citta without any cetasikas. And there are no cetasika without any citta. Citta is an atom of dhamma. Cetasika is another atom of dhamma. Like H2O is a molecule, Ce7Ci is also a dhamma molecule. Ce is cetasika. Ce7 are 7 universal cetasika. Ci is citta. Ce7Ci molecule is pancavinnana molecule. :-) I do not know whether you have physics eye or chemistry eye or bilogy eye or geology eye or philosophy eye etc etc. What I feel is chemistry is the basic of all. Because subatomic level does not deal with realities. Thanks again for your wish. I was considering to post another 3 but not now. Otherwise it will be heavy for today with 6 Dhamma Threads. With Metta, Htoo Naing 39263 From: plnao Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 2:51pm Subject: Re: Kindness in Word, Speech, and Deed Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's ... Hi Ken, and all >>>>And first thing is learning dhamma is about understanding suffering and when we understand that, everything will fall in place. You will naturally be more compassionate, more polite, more kindness and more joyous and not the other way round I think Ken put it very nicely here. I've written before - clumsily - about how I favour equanimity over metta now. Equanimity rooted in understanding the First and Second Noble Truths to the extent that we are capable. If we understanding suffering and the way people are propelled through life by clinging, a compassionate, friendly "we are in the same boat" feeling arises. There is no need to even thinking about smiling when this is the case - the smile arises on its own. And of course it is the mental state that the smile arises from that is the most important thing. Metta, Phil ----- Original Message ----- From: "ashkenn2k" To: Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2004 3:18 AM Subject: Kindness in Word, Speech, and Deed Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's ... > > > Hi Howard and Bhante, > > There is difference between a smile conditioned by kusala behaviour > and using a smile to conditioned a kusala behaviour. When people see > Bhikkhu and smile at them, it is because it is conditioned by good > will. Just like in ancient times, when some people see Buddha, they > felt joyous. If they purposedly have to smile at them, then it is > smile that conditioned kusala behaviour. There is a world of > difference between them. > > Sorry geneorsity in speech does not mean make others smile. Please > see Prince Abaya sutta what is meant by generosity in speech. > > And first thing is learning dhamma is about understanding suffering > and when we understand that, everything will fall in place. You will > naturally be more compassionate, more polite, more kindness and more > joyous and not the other way round, that is why Buddha say Arahant > will never do any more akusala behaviour because there is direct > understanding of suffering, that is why Arahants are also compassion > because of this. It is not the other way round as this can be > conditioned by akusala cittas. > > > Ken O 39264 From: plnao Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 3:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Dear Bhante Vimiliramso, > In Asia where Buddhism is practiced in real ways instead of just > intellectual ideas and debates, generosity is a very important aspect of > life. Every morning the bhikkhus go out on alms round, the people there > are very happy when they see the bhikkhus accepting food and other > requisites. They become inspired to join in and they do this with a real > sincere smile. I've seen how this practice, as pure as it was in its origins, has evolved in Asia. Here in Japan popular interest in Buddhism has almost completely disappeared, largely because of cynicism brought on by people seeing too many "monks" tooling around in Mercedes Benzes. Buddhism is all about money here, about paying monks to chant at funerals and other rites. Ideas and debates will be necessary if Buddhism is ever to be revived. So the practice of dana is not good in itself. It depends on the citta that accompanies the dana. If the goal is to get one's child into a good university, or earn a higher rebirth by paying more (common practice in Japan) dana has become voodoo, and people who care about true goodness give up on Buddhism and look elsewhere. I speak only of Japan. I have given dana in Thailand and it seemed it was very different there. But even in Thailand, I have read that temples sell talismans that are thought to have magic, protective powers, and these talismans are fiercely bought and sold on the open market. I'm afraid we can't idealize Buddhism in Asia. It all depends on the citta. Making a sincere effort to understand mental moments is the only way to guarantee pure dhamma, in my opinion. Metta, Phil p.s interesting note - most Japanese tend to think that Christianity is a pure religion because they see Buddhism as so corrupt. They don't know about the TV evangelists. The grass is always greener on the other side of the ocean! > > Too many people in the West think that the end of suffering is to study, > talk and practice formal meditation, but this is not following the way > they do things in Asia. Generosity can and is practiced in body, helping > others in real physical ways, like showing others a smile, or helping > others to do things that need to be done. A common expression in Asia is > "many hands make the work lighter". > > Generosity in speech means to say things that make others smile, using > speech as a tool to help change a friends frown into a smile. For > example, a the food store while waiting in line you notice that the > cashier is having a rough time with some customers, when you get up to > purchase whatever, you can say something to help the cashier to smile and > relax. > > Generosity in mind means focusing one's mind on wishing others happiness, > while waiting in line at the food store. Otherwise mind takes off and has > a real chance to get involved with unwholesome thoughts and ideas. The > idea to just watch whatever arises and forget mindfulness is a cause of a > very dry type of practice, that takes a long time to develop ergo, the > idea that it may take many lifetimes to accomplish spiritual advancement. > > Without the practice of generosity in body, speech and mind, the Buddha's > teaching are lost in a sea of intellectualizing, and theory. The Buddha > was a very practical teacher, he taught that it is necessary for everyone > to be generous as much as possible daily and to do this with a happy > mind. As KK put it what we think and ponder on, that is the inclination > of one's mind. So thinking kind loving thoughts leads to more kind loving > thoughts. Kind loving actions leads to more kind loving actions. Kind > loving speech leads to more kind loving speech. > > And this is only the first step to be practiced many times during the > day, when one is serious about the Buddha's path. If one must be serious, > be seriously happy and give that happiness away as much as possible. > > The next step in the Buddha's teachings is keeping and following the 5 > precepts. This leads to a tranquil mind that is free from remorse and > anxiety. And only then to practice sitting in meditation. > > It is time to take the Buddha's teachings out of the intellectual and > reinstate it into the practical. That naturally leads to more smiles that > are sincere and a person who practices this, instead of talking about it, > can know for themselves through direct knowledge what this teaching is > all about. > > Maha-Metta > always > Bhante Vimalaramsi > 39265 From: plnao Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 3:36pm Subject: Re: Kindness in Word, Speech, and Deed Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's ... Hi all > There is no need to even thinking about smiling when this is the case - the > smile > arises on its own. And of course it is the mental state that the smile > arises from > that is the most important thing. To add an afternote, I'd say it is the days when the smile just ain't there but we see the unplesant mood as conditioned nama that we make more progress, perhaps, than on days when we are floating in good will all day. When we are full of good will we will surely fail to see how much lobha is involved. I appreciate the Bhante's often mentioning chanda. Desire is not always a bad thing. Thanks also, Howard. I missed the original post first time around with talk of good-will at DSG. You're right. And Rob M is such a good example. I still disagree with the practice of intending to smile at toll-booth operator though. If one smiles, one smiles. If one reflects on the First and Second Noble truths every morning, the smile will come more often than not, I think. Metta arising from equanimity and wisdom rather than metta arising from wanting everybody including ourselves to be happy. Interesting when I'm teaching on a grumpy day. There is irritation at the beginning of the class, but metta always wins out. I don't know why that is. Maybe my students have come to school intending to smile at me!!!! Metta, Phil 39266 From: connieparker Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 4:05pm Subject: Re: What means 'no control' ? And band-aids Hi, Sarah, Joop, James, I think the Agga~n~na is the 'evolutionary' one James mentioned in another post. UP: Decline & Disappearance of Teachings ( decline of Sasana) 11275, 16462, 20878, 209082,4255, 24257, 24386, 24576, 24577, 26329 Sasana (dispensation of the teachings) - decline of 24255, 24257, 24386, 24576, 24577, 25445, 36693 from another post, Sarah: "... points and qus we raised in India are ones we've been raising for yonks..." yonks? years of not knowing something or are they another kind of mind feeders? peace, connie ..... S: Have you read Vism ch x111 on World Cycles about how the world perishes etc? I think you have Vism, but for those who don't it can be found on line in Buddhism in Translation by Henry Clarke Warren Also, see the Agga~n~na Sutta: On Knowledge of Beginnings, DN27 Happy to discuss further. I think there are some posts on it in U.P. ??'Sasana,Decline of..' (Connie, can you remember?) On animals and lack of wisdom etc, see ch 11, Abhidhamma in Daily Life on 'Different types of Patisandhi citta'. On woeful planes like the animal plane, the patisandhi citta is akusala vipaka. No wholesome roots. No chance to develop panna. Many accounts of the woeful states in the suttas too. Metta, Sarah === 39267 From: robmoult Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 4:13pm Subject: Kindness in Word, Speech, and Deed Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's ... Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Rob M - > > A typo correction. > > In a message dated 12/3/04 1:03:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@a... > writes: > > > Bob is only one example. > > ================== > I meant "Rob"! ;-) > No problem :-) It is only a name, a concept, a designation ... it is not a reality :-) Metta, Rob M :-) 39268 From: Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 4:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Howard: "Well, here's a question. Is a mere recognition of hardness *as* hardness deluded? I don't think so. If that recognition also carries with it the idea of hardness being a "thing", especially a self-existent thing, and/or if it carries with it the idea of that hardness being present to a cognizer, there you see ignorance being operative. But if there is nothing more than the recognition of hardness as what it is, I don't see illusion as being involved." Hi Howard, Hardness definitely is not hardness, but I fear I've said too much already. Larry 39269 From: Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 11:18am Subject: Re: Kindness in Word, Speech, and Deed Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's ... Hi, Phil - In a message dated 12/3/04 6:45:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, plnao@j... writes: > I still disagree with the practice of intending to smile at toll-booth > operator though. If > one smiles, one smiles. ====================== If the smiling is motivated by the loving wish that others be happy, even if the smile didn't arise without self-prompting, it is kusala. That's my perspective. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39270 From: Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 11:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi, Larry - In a message dated 12/3/04 7:17:20 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Howard, > > Hardness definitely is not hardness, but I fear I've said too much > already. > > Larry > ===================== I *do* follow you here. Put otherwise: "Hardness" definitely is not hardness. I agree with that. Conceived hardness is different from the directly experienced hardness, itself. However, hardness *is* hardness, but THAT can only be known by the operation of sa~n~na. An animal, without speech or very much in the way of conceptual ability, still recognizes extreme hardness, and that recognition sets in after the unpleasantness of the hardness is experienced. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39271 From: Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 4:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Howard: "I *do* follow you here. Put otherwise: "Hardness" definitely is not hardness. I agree with that. Conceived hardness is different from the directly experienced hardness, itself. However, hardness *is* hardness, but THAT can only be known by the operation of sa~n~na. An animal, without speech or very much in the way of conceptual ability, still recognizes extreme hardness, and that recognition sets in after the unpleasantness of the hardness is experienced." Hi Howard and Ken, I would say hardness can only be truly known by pa~n~na and any knowing other than pa~n~na is delusion. Furthermore, I would say the cause of suffering and the object of desire is concept. If the object of desire were a reality it would have to be seen as a reality by pa~n~na. Sa~n~naa knows the world conceptually. Pa~n~na cannot arise without sa~n~naa but that doesn't make sa~n~naa's knowing any less conceptual. Larry 39272 From: plnao Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 4:49pm Subject: Re: Kindness in Word, Speech, and Deed Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's ... Hi Howard Phil > > I still disagree with the practice of intending to smile at toll-booth > > operator though. If > > one smiles, one smiles. > ====================== Howard > If the smiling is motivated by the loving wish that others be happy, > even if the smile didn't arise without self-prompting, it is kusala. That's my > perspective. Yes, but I suspect that for *some* people who are just starting out, the loving wish for others to be happy is really all about wanting to living in a cozy world in which people wish for each other to be happy. That's not the case for you, or Rob. I just thought that prescriptions for generating loving-kindness can take us off the true path if the "metta" is not preceded by at least a basic degree of insight into the noble truths, at least a basic degree of insight into what *really* makes people happy in the long run. The toll booth operator could have a moment of mudita thanks to our smile, and go back to bitterness because of the next cold person. Now, our smile didn't do him any harm, but if we think we are going through life making a lasting change for people due to our kindness, we are disregarding the imposing nature of the noble truths! I know, I know....methinks too much. It's only because I am so interested in the Brahma-Viharas that I do. I meant to add that this could be another "descriptive vs prescriptive" item. It could be that Rob is describing a practice that evolved as a result of his insight the noble truths. Could be. Not for me to say. If I recall, in his original post on this topic, he started by saying something like "I have developed the habit of smiling at toll booth operators." Forgive me if I've mis-paraphrased you here, Rob. "Developed the habit" sounds quite descriptive. Yes, I went back and checked: "Over the past few weeks, I have developed a habit of smiling at toll booth operators as I pass them. I find this to be a truly effective way of putting metta into my daily life." I would say that growing insight put the metta into his life, the metta arose due to conditions. Very presumptuous of me to say that! Rob knows that I say this with fondness and great respect. Metta, Phil 39273 From: robmoult Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 5:09pm Subject: Giving a Smile Hi All, I strongly agree with Bhante Vimalaramsi's post on practcing generosity. Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote an essay on Dana which can be accessed at: http://www.buddhistinformation.com/dana.htm The opening two paragraphs of this essay are as follows: The practice of giving is universally recognized as one of the most basic human virtues, a quality that testifies to the depth of one's humanity and one's capacity for self-transcendence. In the teaching of the Buddha, too, the practice of giving claims a place of special eminence, one which singles it out as being in a sense the foundation and seed of spiritual development. In the Pali suttas we read time and again that "talk on giving" (danakatha) was invariably the first topic to be discussed by the Buddha in his "graduated exposition" of the Dhamma. Whenever the Buddha delivered a discourse to an audience of people who had not yet come to regard him as their teacher, he would start by emphasizing the value of giving. Only after his audience had come to appreciate this virtue would he introduce other aspects of his teaching, such as morality, the law of kamma, and the benefits in renunciation, and only after all these principles had made their impact on the minds of his listeners would he expound to them that unique discovery of the Awakened Ones, the Four Noble Truths. Strictly speaking, giving does not appear in its own right among the factors of the Noble Eightfold Path, nor does it enter among the other requisites of enlightenment (bodhipakkhiya dhamma). Most probably it has been excluded from these groupings because the practice of giving does not by its own nature conduce directly and immediately to the arising of insight and the realization of the Four Noble Truths. Giving functions in the Buddhist discipline in a different capacity. It does not come at the apex of the path, as a factor constituent of the process of awakening, but rather it serves as a basis and preparation which underlies and quietly supports the entire endeavor to free the mind from the defilements. More than 25 years ago, I was sitting around a campfire with my girlfriend's father (a Christian minister) talking about a system of beliefs that I had developed on my own after years of internal dialogue. Her father (the father) identified my ideas as being Buddhist. I scoffed, saying that I had never read anything about Buddhism and I doubted that independently I had come up with one of the world's major religions! He suggested that I pick up a book on Buddhism, which I did. I still have the book, though the pages are yellowed and the binding is falling apart. It is Walpola Rahula's 100 page "What the Buddha Taught". And so, I was on my way.... Here is the list of chapters from this book: 1. The Buddhist Attitude of Mind (Man is supreme - one is one's own refuge - responsibility - doubt - freedom of thought - tolerance - religion or philosophy - truth has no label - no blind faith or belief - no attachment, even to truth - parable of the raft - imaginary speculations useless - practical attitude - parable of the wounded man) 2. The First Noble Truth: "Dukkha" 3. The Second Noble Truth: Samudaya, "The Arising of Dukkha" 4. The Third Noble Truth: Nirodha, "The Cessation of Dukkha" 5. The Fourth Noble Truth: Magga, "The Path" 6. The Doctrine of No-Soul: Anatta 7. 'Meditation' or Mental Culture: Bhavana 8. What the Buddha Taught and the World Today Rahula's book written in 1958, is a classic introduction of Buddhism to Western readers. I have read a number of other "Introduction to Buddhism" texts and they follow the same pattern of presentation. I find it curious that the order of presentation practiced by the Buddha is almost the opposite of the way in which Buddhism is presented to the West. Before I meditate or go to deliver a dhamma talk, I perform the five point prostration three times, very slowly, in front of a Buddha image. This practice has an effect of calming the mind and improving my "performance". When I start to sit, I start by relaxing by body - starting with the head, moving to the shoulders, etc.. This practice has an effect of calming the body and improving my "performance". I feel that I am very much a beginner and derive great benefits from these preparatory practices. Of course, like the raft, at some point I will cast them aside. One can enter into all sorts of theoretical discussions regarding the technical points of my smiling at toll booth operators, but if we go back to the Kalama Sutta and ask ourselves: - Is the action rooted in attachment or generosity? - Is the action rooted in aversion or loving-kindness? - Is the action rooted in delusion or wisdom? - Is the action censured or praised by the wise? I deeply appreciate Bhante Vimalaramsi's wise words. Metta, Rob M :-) 39274 From: Ken O Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 5:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi Larry Yes sanna helps to build up the conceptual world, that does not mean that sanna is the one that create all the delusion. Sanna remembers and mark a hardness but it is the citta that will have to cognize the hardness. It have to be moha that prevent us to see the three characteristics of object and lobha to continue attached to this conceptual world that we are living in as a wonderful place for continual existence in the samasara. In the suttas, there are many quotes of eradicating the taints, underlying tendecies of the three roots. In CMA, you can see that akusala cittas are all based on the three roots and not sanna. It is definitely panna that eradicates moha, we definitely need sanna again to mark and recognise the object but it is panna that see the danger of moha and lobha of the object being cognized by citta and not sanna. Conceptual world is definitely a strong paccaya for our continual existence. That is why understanding of the reality is important because it make us to see that this conceptual world is illusion, only reality is real. Only when we see in terms of aggregates in paramatha dhamma, then we will able to break the enstranglement by lobha and moha that keep feeding us the wrong information about reality. That is why I feel that anicent commentors always emphasis on reality. Ken O 39275 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 5:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] India discussions - audio version Hello All Thanks for the feedback on the audio files. I hope you're enjoying the listening. Thanks also to Connie and Tom for pointing out mistakes in the links (see below); these have now been corrected. Any further problems encountered, or suggestions for future recordings, I'd be grateful to hear about. My apologies for the somewhat crude editing. The different segments of each talk have been split by using a program that does not allow me to include any overlap between 1 segment and the next. (Going back and doing this manually will be for a future revision.) Jon Off-list contact: jonoabb @ yahoo.com.hk Corrections made Link to wrong file: B. Benares: 03 (was linked to Benares 01) Link not working: J. Gangtok (Sikkim) afternoon: 01, 02, 03, 04. K. Kolkata: 01, 02, 03. --- sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Friends, > > As promised, the recordings of discussions from our recent trip to India > have now been uploaded here: > http://www.dhammastudygroup.org/ > 39276 From: Ken O Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 5:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Giving a Smile Hi Rob M Let me put it very bluntly, because B Bodhi forgets that adosa is generosity. When the path factor becomes samma, generosity will arise because of adosa. In mundane path, adosa can arise with or without panna. With every kusala behaviour (with or without panna) amoha is already there. And that conditions generosity in root conditions. Even the four immeasurables have to arise with adosa as a root. With that understanding, generosity is taught in the 8NP. Ken O 39277 From: Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 0:46pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi, Larry - In a message dated 12/3/04 7:55:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Howard and Ken, > > I would say hardness can only be truly known by pa~n~na and any knowing > other than pa~n~na is delusion. > > Furthermore, I would say the cause of suffering and the object of desire > is concept. If the object of desire were a reality it would have to be > seen as a reality by pa~n~na. Sa~n~naa knows the world conceptually. > Pa~n~na cannot arise without sa~n~naa but that doesn't make sa~n~naa's > knowing any less conceptual. > > Larry > ========================= Well, I don't know what the "official" word is on all this, but to me, any cognitive functioning that operates correctly is operating with wisdom, and any that operates incorrectly is operating with ignorance. If a "being" had no recognitional ability, to ap\plly the term 'wisdom' to him/her would strike me as an odd use of language. Now, if one wanted to say say that sa~n~na freed of avijja is exactly what pa~n~na is, well, that would have some appeal to me. Whether that is properly put, however, I don't know. In Pali, are the words 'sa~n~na' and 'pa~n~na' related semantically or by language history or in some other linguistic manner? With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39278 From: Ken O Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 5:48pm Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi Hugo One thing I respect about Ven B Bodhi translation is that he will put notes on the text which he translated if he thinks it is an error or not correct with the pali sources. I dont think any of those Arahants who transmitted the suttas by mouth than to the texts is capable of misrepresenting buddha. They are incapable of doing anything wrong because there is no more aksuala cittas to conditioned them to do wrong. Nonetheless, we can say there could be some mistakes here and there due to some others, but that is also rare. I at times (in fact quite a few times) talk very directly and strongly. I am quite serious when I talk about Dhamma. Sarah will know that during our conversation in breakfast in Jan :-). Furthermore, I am still learning the dhamma from others and from the texts. I learn from you also because in each, I learn something about my own citta that arise when reading the mail and the reacting to it. Ken O 39279 From: Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 1:02pm Subject: Re: Kindness in Word, Speech, and Deed Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's ... Hi, Phil - In a message dated 12/3/04 7:58:13 PM Eastern Standard Time, plnao@j... writes: > Hi Howard > > Phil >>I still disagree with the practice of intending to smile at > toll-booth > >>operator though. If > >>one smiles, one smiles. > >====================== > Howard > If the smiling is motivated by the loving wish that others > be happy, > >even if the smile didn't arise without self-prompting, it is kusala. > That's my > >perspective. > > Yes, but I suspect that for *some* people who are just starting out, the > loving wish for > others to be happy is really all about wanting to living in a cozy world in > which > people wish for each other to be happy. That's not the case for you, or Rob. > I just > thought that prescriptions for generating loving-kindness can take us off > the true path if the > "metta" is not preceded by at least a basic degree of insight into the noble > truths, > at least a basic degree of insight into what *really* makes people happy in > the > long run. > ----------------------------------------- Howard: Most people have a *basic*, conventional insight, into them. What is significant, of course, is to have direct and penetrating insight. ---------------------------------------- The toll booth operator could have a moment of mudita thanks to> > our > smile, and go back to bitterness because of the next cold person. Now, our > smile > didn't do him any harm, but if we think we are going through life making a > lasting change for people due to our kindness, we are disregarding the > imposing nature > of the noble truths! > ------------------------------------------- Howard: Of course, Phil. But every little bit of kusala is to the good. And every lack of it is the opposite. ---------------------------------------- I know, I know....methinks too much. It's only because> > I am > so interested in the Brahma-Viharas that I do. > > I meant to add that this could be another "descriptive vs prescriptive" > item. > It could be that Rob is describing a practice that evolved as a result of > his > insight the noble truths. Could be. Not for me to say. If I recall, in his > original > post on this topic, he started by saying something like "I have developed > the habit of > smiling at toll booth operators." Forgive me if I've mis-paraphrased you > here, Rob. > "Developed the habit" sounds quite descriptive. > > Yes, I went back and checked: "Over the past few weeks, I have developed a > habit of smiling at toll > booth operators as I pass them. I find this to be a truly effective > way of putting metta into my daily life." I would say that growing insight > put the metta > into his life, the metta arose due to conditions. > ------------------------------------------ Howard: Well, Rob will have to say. But "I have developed" doesn't mean to me the same thing as "There has developed". The first suggests intentional action to me. What is this "horror at intention" on this list? I agree that intention misunderstood suggests self. But intention need not be misunderstood, and it *should* not be feared or, even worse, consigned to a limbo of half-existence. ------------------------------------------- > Very presumptuous of me to say that! Rob knows that I say this with > fondness and great respect. > > Metta, > Phil > > ========================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39280 From: Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 6:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi Ken and Howard, The root of the problem with lobha, dosa, moha is conceptualization. Does that not interest you? What is the source of conceptualization? Larry 39281 From: Ken O Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 7:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O HI Larry The root of the problem is not conceptualization, the root of the problem is the three roots that conditioned these conceptualizations. They are the source. That is why the first thing to eradicate during stream entry is the eradication of a view to self. To me because of the attachment to the view of a self, we keep conceptualization the world, again to me our conceptualization in this world in one way or another is conditioned by the 'I' factor. I hope this helps. Ken O 39282 From: Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 2:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi, Larry (and Ken) - In a message dated 12/3/04 10:07:42 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Ken and Howard, > > The root of the problem with lobha, dosa, moha is conceptualization. > Does that not interest you? What is the source of conceptualization? > > Larry > ======================== Larry, many animals are relatively free of conceptual function, more than humans. Are they, then, wiser than humans and closer to enlightenment? With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39283 From: Ken O Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 8:11pm Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi Hugo SN is Samyutta Nikaya. In Nidanasamyutta, SN II.17 The Naked Ascetic Kassapa <<"How is it, Master Gotama: is suffering created by onself?" "Not so, Kassapa," the Blessed One said. "Then, Master Gotama, is suffering creating by another?" "Not so Kassapa," the Blessed One said. "How is then, Master Gotama: is suffering creatd both by oneself and another?" "Not so Kassapa," the Blessed One said. "Then is it that Master Gotama: has suffering arisen fortuitously, being created by neither by oneself nor by another?" "Not so Kassapa," the Blessed One said. "How is then, Master Gotama: is there no suffering.?" "It is not that there is no suffering, Kassapa; there is suffering." . . . "Kassapa, [if one thinks] 'The one who acts in the same as the one who experiences [the result], [then one asserts] with reference to one existing from the begining: "Suffering is created by oneself." When one asserts thus, this amounts to eternalism. But Kassapa [if one thinks,] 'The one who act is one, the one who experiences [the result] is another,' [then one asserts] with reference to one stricken by feeling: "Suffering is created by another.' When one asserts thus, this amounts to annihilationism. Without veering towards either of these extremes, the Tagathata teaches the Dhamma by the middle: 'With ignorance as condition, volitional formation [come to be]......>> k: My comments: When one assert that suffering is creatd by oneself and not by conditions, the attachment to oneself will not ceased. In the same way, when there is believe one can created or do a certain practise and believe that such kusala behaviour is the development of salvation, that is eternalism. k: Without veering towards either...the only way one understand ignorance.... is to have wise attention when such conditions arise and when they fall. Because any attempt in the believe that oneself can create more kusala behaviour there is veering to one extreme. k: When one practise smiling, that smile is veer to oneside because one believe that such a smile can condition kusala behaviour on oneself or others. When one see these three characteristics in the D.O, compassion will arise as one sees beings are deluded and one is strongly conditioned by compassion to teach them the dhamma so that they can also be free of suffering. Compassion arise due to seeing people in suffering. Generosity will also arise. These are purely my personal comments. Ken O 39284 From: Antony Woods Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 8:32pm Subject: Re: Metta for oneself translation question Dear Sarah, Previously I wrote: >Using logic (which isn't a|ways good Dhamma), as the Buddha said >that "one who loves himself does not harm another", whether or not >one *deserves* love and affection for oneself, does it follow that >one who *doesn't* love himself *is* harming others? The translation you quoted was more like “one who loves himself //should// not harm another” which really helps. This makes a huge difference. I think the Buddha meant just that we should not harm others. He wasn’t saying to cultivate concern for oneself in order to love others. Undue concern for oneself can be translated as “worry” which is easier to see as attachment and a hindrance. “Self-obsession” could also apply. A friend of mine says affectionately “Now quit that worrying, silly boy!” May you be well and happy, Antony. 39285 From: Date: Fri Dec 3, 2004 8:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi Ken and Howard, Permanence and self are not just concepts. They are the nature of all concepts. All concepts are not impermanent and all concepts assume a self. Any being that desires desires a concept. Larry 39286 From: Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 0:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi, Larry - In a message dated 12/3/04 11:34:29 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Ken and Howard, > > Permanence and self are not just concepts. They are the nature of all > concepts. All concepts are not impermanent and all concepts assume a > self. Any being that desires desires a concept. > > Larry > ======================= Larry, you wrote "Any being that desires desires a concept." Are you completely certain of that, always? The Buddha's layout of D.O. gives phassa -> vedana -> tanha. It is generally understood that the tanha is a craving or aversion directly for the vedana or, indirectly, for the object of the phassa that conditioned the vedana. In either case, unless that object is concept (and there are 5 non-mind-door possibilities beside that), what is desired is not concept. Now, one might ask where sa~n~na fits into this. If I'm correct in my interpolating sa~n~na between vedana and tanha, so that recognition is required for reaction, that's where it fits in. But wordless recognition, say of pleasant warmth upon entering a bath tub, while basis for concept is not yet concept. Concept is projected by sankharic processing (thinking, basically), and sa~n~na is a separate khandha sankhara. At the elementary level, using the tub example, contact with warmth conditions pleasant feeling which conditions (wordless) recognition of the pleasant warmth, which conditions craving and then grasping. Further mental proliferation can quickly yield concept-contacts (pertaining to bathtubs, for example), further associated vedana, further recognition, and further tanha, and at this level, we have desire for concept. That is how I see the matter. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39287 From: Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 0:42am Subject: Typo Correction Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi, Larry - In a message dated 12/4/04 8:34:09 AM Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: > sa~n~na is a > separate khandha sankhara ==================== I missed the word 'from'. This was intended to be "sa~n~na is a separate khandha from sankhara." With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39288 From: plnao Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 6:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Hello again Bhante, and all Mu apologies for going overboard on criticizing the way dana has come to be practiced in parts of Asia. It is a peeve of mine that comes up every 2 or 3 months, and which I always end up apologizing for. It's just so frustrating to see so many people suffering in Japan (the suicide rate is higher than ever) when Dhamma could help them so much. But it seems Dhamma has been distorted in a way so that its healing truth can't even begin to get through. A good friend in Dhamma consoled me by reminding me that the Buddha predicted such a decline, but it still gives rise to frustration at times. Metta, Phil ----- Original Message ----- From: "plnao" To: Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2004 8:02 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas > > > > Dear Bhante Vimiliramso, > > > In Asia where Buddhism is practiced in real ways instead of just > > intellectual ideas and debates, generosity is a very important aspect of > > life. Every morning the bhikkhus go out on alms round, the people there > > are very happy when they see the bhikkhus accepting food and other > > requisites. They become inspired to join in and they do this with a real > > sincere smile. > > I've seen how this practice, as pure as it was in its origins, has evolved > in Asia. Here in Japan popular interest in Buddhism has almost > completely disappeared, largely because of cynicism brought on by > people seeing too many "monks" tooling around in Mercedes Benzes. > Buddhism is all about money here, about paying > monks to chant at funerals and other rites. Ideas and debates will be > necessary > if Buddhism is ever to be revived. So the practice of dana is not good > in itself. It depends on the citta that accompanies the dana. > If the goal is to get one's child into a good university, or earn a higher > rebirth > by paying more (common practice in Japan) dana has become voodoo, > and people who care about true goodness give up on Buddhism and look > elsewhere. > > I speak only of Japan. I have given dana in Thailand and it seemed it was > very different there. But even in Thailand, I have read that temples > sell talismans that are thought to have magic, protective powers, and these > talismans are fiercely bought and sold on the open market. > > I'm afraid we can't idealize Buddhism in Asia. > It all depends on the citta. Making a sincere effort to understand mental > moments is > the only way to guarantee pure dhamma, in my opinion. > > Metta, > Phil > p.s interesting note - most Japanese tend to think that Christianity is a > pure > religion because they see Buddhism as so corrupt. They don't > know about the TV evangelists. The grass is always greener on the other side > of the ocean! > > > > > > > > Too many people in the West think that the end of suffering is to study, > > talk and practice formal meditation, but this is not following the way > > they do things in Asia. Generosity can and is practiced in body, helping > > others in real physical ways, like showing others a smile, or helping > > others to do things that need to be done. A common expression in Asia is > > "many hands make the work lighter". > > > > Generosity in speech means to say things that make others smile, using > > speech as a tool to help change a friends frown into a smile. For > > example, a the food store while waiting in line you notice that the > > cashier is having a rough time with some customers, when you get up to > > purchase whatever, you can say something to help the cashier to smile and > > relax. > > > > Generosity in mind means focusing one's mind on wishing others happiness, > > while waiting in line at the food store. Otherwise mind takes off and has > > a real chance to get involved with unwholesome thoughts and ideas. The > > idea to just watch whatever arises and forget mindfulness is a cause of a > > very dry type of practice, that takes a long time to develop ergo, the > > idea that it may take many lifetimes to accomplish spiritual advancement. > > > > Without the practice of generosity in body, speech and mind, the Buddha's > > teaching are lost in a sea of intellectualizing, and theory. The Buddha > > was a very practical teacher, he taught that it is necessary for everyone > > to be generous as much as possible daily and to do this with a happy > > mind. As KK put it what we think and ponder on, that is the inclination > > of one's mind. So thinking kind loving thoughts leads to more kind loving > > thoughts. Kind loving actions leads to more kind loving actions. Kind > > loving speech leads to more kind loving speech. > > > > And this is only the first step to be practiced many times during the > > day, when one is serious about the Buddha's path. If one must be serious, > > be seriously happy and give that happiness away as much as possible. > > > > The next step in the Buddha's teachings is keeping and following the 5 > > precepts. This leads to a tranquil mind that is free from remorse and > > anxiety. And only then to practice sitting in meditation. > > > > It is time to take the Buddha's teachings out of the intellectual and > > reinstate it into the practical. That naturally leads to more smiles that > > are sincere and a person who practices this, instead of talking about it, > > can know for themselves through direct knowledge what this teaching is > > all about. > > > > Maha-Metta > > always > > Bhante Vimalaramsi 39289 From: plnao Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 6:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Giving a Smile Hi Rob Thanks always for your patience. > Before I meditate or go to deliver a dhamma talk, I perform the five > point prostration three times, very slowly, in front of a Buddha > image. This practice has an effect of calming the mind and improving > my "performance". When I start to sit, I start by relaxing by body - > starting with the head, moving to the shoulders, etc.. This practice > has an effect of calming the body and improving my "performance". This aspect of devotion is missing from my practice. I bow to the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha every morning, but it is in a kind of hurried way, and I wouldn't do it if Naomi were in the room. I'm not comfortable with devotion, yet. Will it arise. Of course I hope it will. > I feel that I am very much a beginner and derive great benefits from > these preparatory practices. Of course, like the raft, at some point > I will cast them aside. You give us all so many opportunities to rejoice in your kusala. Your wife on the beach, the Dhamma meetings at your home, your patience with am irrate woman somewhere, your eightfold path for teens talk....and the toll booth operator. I was thinking today that it was an opportunity to rejoice in your kusala, and I missed it - again. So I rejoice now. > One can enter into all sorts of theoretical discussions regarding > the technical points of my smiling at toll booth operators, but if > we go back to the Kalama Sutta and ask ourselves: > - Is the action rooted in attachment or generosity? > - Is the action rooted in aversion or loving-kindness? > - Is the action rooted in delusion or wisdom? > - Is the action censured or praised by the wise? Again, no doubt about *your* smile. And you didn't post it back then to prescribe it to others, so I'm sorry if I suggested that you were. But yes, it it were *me*, a rank beginner, I would want to be wondering if it were rooted in attachment or generosity, and whether it were rooted in aversion or loving-kindness. For me, metta practice was almost a form of sensual pleasure. I thought of something related to that today. Today it was very cold in our house - there's no central heating here. Some cold days I run a hot bath just to warm up in. Such clinging to warmth, and taking a bath to warm up in that way is so futile, because it wears off so fast. Metta was like that for me, providing balmy comofrt on cold days of the soul. And I think of the sutta in Samyutta Nikaya in which the Buddha says that some people have no way to escape painful feeling except by sensual pleasure. (In the sutta entitled "The Dart") When I practiced metta, it was because I was so alienated in Japanese society. I tried to metta my way out of my discomfort. Sometimes it worked. But seeing through to the reasons people do the things they do liberated me from being hurt by them. Now when metta arises it's because obstacles to it are falling, being eradicated. But that's my story. I was using metta for personal comfort, there's no doubt about that. That is not the case for you - no doubt about that either. Now I *do* promise that I won't bring up the toll booth operator again! Metta, Phil 39290 From: Hugo Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 7:12am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) On Sat, 4 Dec 2004 04:11:55 +0000 (GMT), Ken O wrote: > SN is Samyutta Nikaya. Thanks. > k: Without veering towards either...the only way one understand > ignorance.... is to have wise attention when such conditions arise > and when they fall. Because any attempt in the believe that oneself > can create more kusala behaviour there is veering to one extreme. Let me see if I understand correctly what you are saying. Are you saying that we can't create kusala behaviour at all? > k: When one practise smiling, that smile is veer to oneside because > one believe that such a smile can condition kusala behaviour on > oneself or others. How would you explain the fact that my anger is extinguished once I start smiling to myself? Emphasis on the word "fact", because I have experimented that not once, but many times. Also, how come I feel anger under very specific conditions (well, sometimes not THAT specific), and not just "out of the blue". I mean, I am not meditating and pooof!, anger arises, anger normally follows a thought, a memory, etc. (while in meditation). There have been times when it SEEMS that anger arises out of the blue, but upon observation and analysis, I have discovered that there are certain reasons (a thought, a feeling, a mental fabrication, a perception, etc.). So, something conditioned anger, then anger conditioned akusala actions, that leads me to believe that kusala action CAN be made arise by "preparing a mix" of the right conditions. I am following a similar line of thought that the Buddha used to describe how to dissassemble the Dependent Arising links. > When one see these three characteristics in the > D.O, compassion will arise as one sees beings are deluded and one is > strongly conditioned by compassion to teach them the dhamma so that > they can also be free of suffering. Compassion arise due to seeing > people in suffering. Just by "SEEING" people suffering? I disagree. I bet there are certain behaviours or actions that you perform that you dislike, you know you should NOT do it, you can SEE that you are doing them and yet you keep doing them (maybe you even say to yourself "I shouldn't be doing this"), and still you do it once more time. I can bet on that because that happens to me and a lot of people I know, and even people I don't know (alcoholics, drug addicts, addicted gamblers, etc.) So, just SEEING things happen doesn't make anything arise. I think the Buddha said that the key for all is volition, not seeing, and that you have to make the right choices. -- Hugo 39291 From: Hugo Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 7:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Hello Phil, On Sat, 4 Dec 2004 23:05:16 +0900, plnao wrote: > Mu apologies for going overboard on criticizing the way > dana has come to be practiced in parts of Asia. Actually I thank you very much for that post! I am always looking for those kind of things to keep me "centered" on what I believe in, and practice. We should not be deluded by thinking that having the label "Buddhist" makes you good automatically, because "Buddhist" is just that, a label. My teacher (I still don't know if I should refer to him as "my teacher", but anyhow) has told us some stories about things that are not quite by-the-book in Thailand. Let's also remember that Buddhism could be seen more of a "cultural/religious" phenomena, because people merged their cultural background and old practices with the teachings of Buddha. That's why sometimes I think that if asked I will say that I am an "upasaka" instead of a Buddhist, as to make the point that I follow the instructions of Buddha and not follow any of the cultural traditions of Buddhism. Greetings, -- Hugo 39292 From: Hugo Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 7:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Giving a Smile Dear Phil, On Sat, 4 Dec 2004 23:44:07 +0900, plnao wrote: > This aspect of devotion is missing from my practice. I bow to the Buddha, > the Dhamma and the Sangha every morning, but it is in a kind of hurried way, > and I wouldn't do it if Naomi were in the room. I'm not comfortable with > devotion, yet. Will it arise. Of course I hope it will. Similar feeling at first, and let's not forget the feeling that arose the first time I went to the monastery and bowed there in the middle of the room, with other people!!!, aaaaah!, and what about when the chanting (in Pali) started with the palms together in front of the chest while kneeling!!!! Panic, laugh, fear, confusion, all mixed together in a soup of nerves!!! Ah!, and bowing to the monks??????.....mmmmm......let's pretend I didn't know that was a custom. what I did? Just follow Buddha's instructions to Rahula. When I am performing each bow, I stay with my forehead to the floor and ask myself "why am I doing this?", or I skip the question and give the answer instead. Now, I gladly bow to the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha, the other day I really appreciated the monks and bowed to them (well, it was only one that day). Actually I have found that's the simplest, most useful and more direct teaching of the Buddha (so far I have read): Ask yourself WHY you do EACH and EVERY thing!!! Try that for just one day and you will see and understand a LOT of things!! Other benefits: it will prevent you from performing akusala actions, it will show you anicca, dukkha and anatta "in action" right on the spot! It really works!!! Greetings, -- Hugo 39293 From: Ken O Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 8:47am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi Hugo > Are you saying that we can't create kusala behaviour at all? How would you explain the fact that my anger is extinguished once I > start smiling to myself? Emphasis on the word "fact", because I have experimented that not once, but many times. k: We cannot purposedly practise a kusala behaviour. Once there is self involved that "hey I must do this in order for that" then that is eternalism. k: Anger is impermanent so it will ceased to exist once another citta comes to arise. But using smile to a way to eradicate an anger will not develop understanding of the underlying tendecies of anger which is the important for one to become enlighted. You only condition another citta to arise when you used smile. That smile you smile can be likely rooted in lobha because the intention was to change the anger. The more you practise this type of smile, the underlying tendency for lobha becomes more intensify hence the more pleasant feeling you have. SN 12.38 Volition (1) <> H: Just by "SEEING" people suffering? I disagree. k: Hmm then tell me your point of view then. Ken O 39294 From: Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 4:03am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi, Ken (and Hugo) - In a message dated 12/4/04 11:49:09 AM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: > Hi Hugo > > > >Are you saying that we can't create kusala behaviour at all? How > would you explain the fact that my anger is extinguished once I > >start smiling to myself? Emphasis on the word "fact", because I > have experimented that not once, but many times. > > > k: We cannot purposedly practise a kusala behaviour. Once there is > self involved that "hey I must do this in order for that" then that > is eternalism. ---------------------------------- Howard: Ken, do you presume that because Hugo used the word 'we' and 'I' in speaking of creating kusala behavior, there must be a "self" involved? I believe you use those words all the time, as do we all, and as did the Buddha. Cetana does not require a self. In fact, nothing does, as there is no self. It seems to me that you are setting up a straw man that you point to every time someone speaks about volitional action and that you rely upon to attempt to demonstrate the futility, if not impossibility, of such action, even though the Buddha countenanced it, calling it "kamma". ======================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39295 From: Hugo Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 9:04am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hello Ken, I don't like to do this kind of thing, and I am still debating if I should do it now, but I can see more harm than good on maintaining this discussion so here I go: In this and previous posts of you, I have found several inconsistencies of logic, one example: You said, in two different paragraphs, but the same message: > k: We cannot purposedly practise a kusala behaviour. > > You only condition another citta to arise when you used smile. So, can I condition something or not? Also you seem to agree with me: > But using smile to a way to eradicate an anger will > not develop understanding of the underlying tendecies of anger which > is the important for one to become enlighted. In the above paragraph I understand that you agree that the smile helps extinguish the anger. Also, you seem to not understand what I said, or you understand it but keep driving the discussion to a topic you know or want to discuss. I NEVER said that the smile will lead me to enlightenment. I said that I used the smile as a tool to prevent me from performing akusala actions. Then once I am more calm I can analyze the situation and develop wisdom. > H: Just by "SEEING" people suffering? I disagree. > > k: Hmm then tell me your point of view then. I already explained (now I really believe that you are not listening to what I say), you SEE, then you DECIDE and ACT. Certainly not all serial murderers feel compassion when they see the suffering of people, maybe not even one of them. Some Intensive care physicians no longer feel compassion for their patients when they see them suffering (I am not a physicians but I know plenty of them in a close-relationship way!). Ken, you keep ignoring several of the comments that I make, while you keep pushing your own views (and let's not forget the incongruencies you expose, like the example above or the fact that you said you are a fundamentalist and at the same time you say you are a follower of Buddha who explained the Middle Way, and being a fundamentalist definitely is not the Middle way), this definitely does not conduce to a good discussion. I think it would be more useful, if we stop discussing, and keep helping us pointing out what WE KNOW in future discussions. Other than that I have nothing else to say and I wish to conclude this discussion. -- Hugo 39296 From: Ken O Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 9:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi Larry L: Permanence and self are not just concepts. They are the nature of > all concepts. All concepts are not impermanent and all concepts assume a self. Any being that desires desires a concept. k: Concepts do not deteroriate or have dukkha because they are not reality. Concepts are imaginery or dreams. But concepts can act has a paccaya. in regard to whether concept is the root of D.O, maybe this will help, SN 14.13 (3) The Brick Hill <> SN 14.12 (2) With a source. <> This shows sensual preception could not arise without a sense data. In this way we can say concepts cannot arise without first being conditioned by reality (sensual elements). Since the underlying tendency is already sensual, so the mind naturally is obsessed with passion over these sensuality. Ken O 39297 From: Ken O Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 9:38am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi Hugo > You said, in two different paragraphs, but the same message: > > > k: We cannot purposedly practise a kusala behaviour. > You only condition another citta to arise when you used smile. K: I used you here is to show that the I is involved when you used smile because you are purposedly doing it. > So, can I condition something or not? k: Nope, because I is delusion. I is eternalism. > In the above paragraph I understand that you agree that the smile > helps extinguish the anger. k: Sorry for not being clear. I am saying that when you used a smile to change anger, you are not mindful of the anger that arise which means you are not mindful of the underlying tendecies to anger also. Only when there is wise attention (mindfullness + panna), then the underlying tendecies of anger can be eradicated. Path to enlightement is the eradication of underlying tendecies, the taints, the fermentations. > I NEVER said that the smile will lead me to enlightenment. I said > that I used the smile as a tool to prevent me from performing > akusala actions. Then once I am more calm I can analyze the situation and develop wisdom. k: I was saying that using it as a tool only conditioned the I concept. The only way to prevent oneself to doing akusala behaviour is wise attention to anger and not trying to change anger. The calm you experience by doing this is because lobha mula cittas can be both pleasant and calm. What you have done is only strengthening the concept of 'I' . Why? because you are using a tool that you think or you think you intend to change your behaviour. H: You SEE, then you DECIDE and ACT. Certainly not all serial murderers feel compassion when they see the suffering of people, maybe not even one of them. Some Intensive care physicians no longer feel compassion for their patients when they see them suffering (I am not a physicians but I know plenty of them in a close-relationship way!). k: Because of delusion that is why they behave in this way. The suffering is not seen as suffering, impermanent is not seen as impermenant. When we penetrate the meaning of suffering, then compassion will arise. Seeing is just another sense data, there can be also listening that compassion will arise. I should say compassion arise out of "knowing" suffering in others. > > Ken, you keep ignoring several of the comments that I make, while > you keep pushing your own views (and let's not forget the > incongruencies you expose, like the example above or the fact that you said you are a fundamentalist and at the same time you say you are a follower of Buddha who explained the Middle Way, and being a fundamentalist definitely is not the Middle way), this definitely does not conduce to a good discussion. k: You do not understand what I say, that is okay and I am not surprise a single bit because I known people like us are dinosaurs, we are going extinct. People who believe in wise attention are getting lesser and lesser. Ken O 39298 From: Ken O Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 9:53am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi Howard ---------------------------------- > Howard: > Ken, do you presume that because Hugo used the word 'we' and > 'I' in speaking of creating kusala behavior, there must be a "self" > involved? I believe you use those words all the time, as do we all, and as did the Buddha. Cetana does not require a self. In fact, nothing does, as there is no self. It seems to me that you are setting up a straw man that you point to every time someone speaks about volitional action and that you rely upon to attempt to demonstrate the futility, if not impossibility, of such action, > even though the Buddha countenanced it, calling it "kamma". > ======================== k: When there is purposed action to eradicated a akusala behaviour, the inital basis already itself eternalism. Cetana does not required a self in the D.O - is only applicable to Arahants not us where the Arahant taints have been completely eradicated. For worldings cetana does acquire self in the underlying tendecies (attach to a self view). We have to differentiate that. The only way out as I said, wise attention, that is the middle way. Anyting we wish to use as tool or as a devlopment practise, will hinge on this inital basis. Ken O 39299 From: m. nease Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 10:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi Ken, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ken O" To: Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 9:55 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O > There are still more of it I think Nidanavagga is a very good place > to look at the many diverse way D.O is taught I think you're right--I've just been reading this and and can't think of a better or more concentrated example of abhidhamma in the suttas than the ninety-three paragraphs of the Nidaanavagga ('The Kindred Sayings on Cause' per Mrs. Rhys-Davies). Can anyone recommend a better English translation? Thanks for pointing this out. mike 39300 From: Hugo Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 10:27am Subject: Re: Kindness in Word, Speech, and Deed Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's ... On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 21:02:30 EST, upasaka@a... wrote: > Howard: > Well, Rob will have to say. But "I have developed" doesn't mean to me > the same thing as "There has developed". The first suggests intentional action > to me. What is this "horror at intention" on this list? I agree that > intention misunderstood suggests self. But intention need not be misunderstood, and it > *should* not be feared or, even worse, consigned to a limbo of > half-existence. Or in other words, it is a way to use the concept of "self" skillfully. Also avoiding the use of the words "I", "me", "mine", etc.. does not equal getting rid of the concept of self and viceversa. Otherwise why the Buddha advised his son as follows: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn061.html "What do you think, Rahula: What is a mirror for?" Why he didn't say "What thinking arises Rahula?" "Whenever you want to perform a bodily act, you should reflect on it...." Why he didn't say "Whenever a bodily act arises, a reflection should arise....." ? and heresy!!, the Buddha advices: "This bodily act I want to perform" The Buddha himself is telling his son to think "I WANT", Now, some people will say that the translation is not accurate, so let's look for another: http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima2/061-ambalatthika-rahulovada-e1.htm "Rahula, when a desire arises to do some bodily action, you should reflect. Doing this bodily action, will I be troubled, will others be troubled, will both be troubled." Ah!, here the Buddha indeed says something similar to what I asked before "when a desire arises", so this might be a good translation isn't it? But, continue reading, and it says: "you should reflect.........will I be troubled.....will others.....will both..." mmmmm...so again the Buddha seems to be affirming the self according to some people here isn't it? Now, lets compare to two other languages (German and French): According to : http://www.palikanon.com/majjhima/majjhima1.htm These translations are NOT from Thanissaro's but were done in 1957. "Was immer du, Rahulo, für eine Tat begehn willst, eben diese Tat sollst du dir betrachten:" Again, the Buddha uses "du" (that means you in German). Also we can notice it is a different translation than Thanissaro because it doesn't refer to "body" at all, it uses the word "Tat" which means "Act" (as in action or deed). So, is the Buddha affirming the self? Still not satisfied, let's look for a French translation, unfortunately I didn't find any explanation as of where did they go it: "Quelle que soit l'action que vous voulez faire avec votre corps, ô Rahula, vous devez réfléchir: Cette action corporelle que je veux accomplir avec mon corps" Again, here it uses "vous" and "je" (meaning "you" and "I"), so is it affirming the self?, and in this translation it mentions the body. BTW, anybody could provide the Pali sentence and own translation, my knowledge of Pali, is extreeeeemely basic. Greetings, -- Hugo 39301 From: Hugo Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 10:37am Subject: Fwd: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) mlnease (sorry you didn't sign any name) Sent me the following off-list, but I think it is very useful to have it as part of the thread. ============================================== From: m. nease Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 09:51:44 -0800 I think this one's brilliant--no expectations, no anger. AN X.80: Aghata Sutta ============================================== I just read it (it is very short), it is good, maybe dry, but good. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an10-080.html Greetings, -- Hugo 39302 From: Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 6:27am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi, Ken - In a message dated 12/4/04 12:39:02 PM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: > K: I used you here is to show that the I is involved when you used > smile because you are purposedly doing it. > ================== Then do not purposely do *anything*. Do not purposely eat or take medicine or say hello & goodbye or read suttas or study Abhidhamma, for when you do so, so you say, "the I is involved". Ken if one consistently insists on presuming self whenever cetana is involved, one inevitable result will be rapid death. Thank goodness you, depite your heartfelt intentions, cannot be even close to consistent in this!! You are listing way too far to the left, Ken. Or is it to the right? (I never know which political metaphor is appropriate!) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39303 From: Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 6:51am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi, Ken - In a message dated 12/4/04 12:54:20 PM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: > k: When there is purposed action to eradicated a akusala behaviour, > the inital basis already itself eternalism. Cetana does not required > a self in the D.O - is only applicable to Arahants not us where the > Arahant taints have been completely eradicated. For worldings cetana > does acquire self in the underlying tendecies (attach to a self > view). We have to differentiate that. The only way out as I said, > wise attention, that is the middle way. Anyting we wish to use as > tool or as a devlopment practise, will hinge on this inital basis ===================== I have three comments, Ken: (1) The exercise of wise attention, unless you believe in conditions arising randomly, requires volitional cultivation,(2) I think you would do well to look up the phrase "Catch 22", and (3) I recommend a fresh reading of the suttas on your part. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39304 From: Hugo Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 0:12pm Subject: Another Danger of discussions: affirmation of Self I just had a quick "standing" meditation (when you stand up close your eyes and meditate for a couple of minutes). I just discovered and experienced the fact that discussions have another danger (I have talked about the benefits and dangers of group discussions in several other threads). This danger that I discovered and experienced (I did not inferred, I experimented it then I reflected on what was that experience) is the fact that if you are not careful, dicussions will lead you to affirm the "SELF". How?, in different ways, but mostly when you start defending "your view", against "the view of the other". In plain English, some people might refer to this phenomena as "taking it personally", I think that phrase reflects what I am trying to say, maybe not 100%, but pretty good. There are other factors that make it worse, if during the discussion any of the three poisons appear (well, it is guaranteed that they will if we are not arahants, but I mean, if they appear extremely obvious). If anger appears, you want to defend your position out of the anger, it affirms the self. If greed appears, you want to defend your position to show off, it affirms the self. If ignorance appears, you may make the other poisons to appear, and you might fuel the other parties poisons. In summary, discuss, but be mindful and keep a balance with the other aspects of the practice. I am babbling, but I hope you get some food for thought, and if not, I don't care (big smile), as there is no "I" who cares. ;-D -- Hugo 39305 From: Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 7:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Danger of discussions: affirmation of Self Hi, Hugo - You are correct in what you say in the following [copied below] about the possibility of list discussions supporting sense of self. It can do so primarily by means of clinging to views and, as you well point out, anger. The worst situation is when the anger is so called "righteous anger", which actually has nothing righteous about it! On the other hand, and there almost always is an other hand ;-), if one is mindfully on the look-out for clinging to views and the arising of anger, discussions may afford folks a wonderful practice opportunity. And, of course, there is much to learn about the Dhamma from all the truly knowledgeable and kind folks on DSG and other lists. With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/4/04 3:12:24 PM Eastern Standard Time, eklektik@g... writes: > > I just had a quick "standing" meditation (when you stand up close your > eyes and meditate for a couple of minutes). > > I just discovered and experienced the fact that discussions have > another danger (I have talked about the benefits and dangers of group > discussions in several other threads). > > This danger that I discovered and experienced (I did not inferred, I > experimented it then I reflected on what was that experience) is the > fact that if you are not careful, dicussions will lead you to affirm > the "SELF". > > How?, in different ways, but mostly when you start defending "your > view", against "the view of the other". In plain English, some people > might refer to this phenomena as "taking it personally", I think that > phrase reflects what I am trying to say, maybe not 100%, but pretty > good. > > There are other factors that make it worse, if during the discussion > any of the three poisons appear (well, it is guaranteed that they will > if we are not arahants, but I mean, if they appear extremely obvious). > > If anger appears, you want to defend your position out of the anger, > it affirms the self. > If greed appears, you want to defend your position to show off, it > affirms the self. > If ignorance appears, you may make the other poisons to appear, and > you might fuel the other parties poisons. > > In summary, discuss, but be mindful and keep a balance with the other > aspects of the practice. > > I am babbling, but I hope you get some food for thought, and if not, I > don't care (big smile), as there is no "I" who cares. ;-D > > -- > Hugo > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39306 From: buddhatrue Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 1:09pm Subject: Re: Giving a Smile --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > Hi Rob M > > Let me put it very bluntly, because B Bodhi forgets that adosa is > generosity. When the path factor becomes samma, generosity will > arise because of adosa. In mundane path, adosa can arise with or > without panna. With every kusala behaviour (with or without panna) > amoha is already there. And that conditions generosity in root > conditions. Even the four immeasurables have to arise with adosa as > a root. With that understanding, generosity is taught in the 8NP. > > > Ken O Friend Ken O, I wanted to understand your rather cryptic message, especially since it questions the understanding of B. Bodhi, so I went to the trouble of defining all of the Pali terms you use. This is a rather rare even for me I assure you!! ;-)). However, here is what I came up with: Adosa (absence of ill will) Samma (right view) Amoha (absence of bewilderment) Panna (wisdom) Kusala (meritorious, good) Now, here is your message without all of the Pali: "Let me put it very bluntly, because B Bodhi forgets that the absence of ill will is generosity. When the path factor becomes right view, generosity will arise because of the absence of ill will. In mundane path, the absence of ill will can arise with or without wisdom. With every good behaviour (with or without wisdom) the absence of bewilderment is already there. And that conditions generosity in root conditions. Even the four immeasurables have to arise with absence of ill will as a root. With that understanding, generosity is taught in the 8NP." Ken O, what are you talking about?? The absence of ill will isn't automatically generosity; it could be equanimity, or metta, or joy, or bliss…etc., etc., etc. You are making a false assumption. Not only that, your use of Pali terms greatly oversimplifies the matter. It appears to me that you have this idea that dhamma is predominately a matter of simple Pali terms, almost like chess pieces, and those with enough cunning (panna) will win the game. Well, the dhamma isn't a game and there aren't any rules with simple pieces to move around in a manner described by the Buddha. I believe the dhamma is a complex business with infinite variables. Knowing Pali and throwing the terms about indiscriminately doesn't make one wise. Here we have B. Bodhi who gave a very detailed analysis of the importance of generosity in the Buddhist's life, using examples from the suttas and intelligent analysis, and you seem to think that you can dismiss it all with a haphazard explosion of Pali terms. I hope that I am not the only one who sees a problem with that. Ken O, frankly it seems to me that you are very unhappy lately, perhaps for personal reasons, and you want to take it out on others. Really, I hope I have compassion for you and understanding. But that is not the way to handle the situation. Try to follow what everyone has been telling you lately: confront pessimism with optimism; confront a frown with a smile; confront dukkha with nibbana. Hope I haven't been too personal. Good wishes to you. Metta, James 39307 From: robmoult Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 3:07pm Subject: Re: Giving a Smile Hi James / Ken O, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O > wrote: > > Hi Rob M > > > > Let me put it very bluntly, because B Bodhi forgets that adosa is > > generosity. When the path factor becomes samma, generosity will > > arise because of adosa. In mundane path, adosa can arise with or > > without panna. With every kusala behaviour (with or without panna) > > amoha is already there. And that conditions generosity in root > > conditions. Even the four immeasurables have to arise with adosa > as > > a root. With that understanding, generosity is taught in the > 8NP. > > > > > > Ken O > > Friend Ken O, > > I wanted to understand your rather cryptic message, especially since > it questions the understanding of B. Bodhi, so I went to the trouble > of defining all of the Pali terms you use. This is a rather rare > even for me I assure you!! ;-)). However, here is what I came up > with: > > Adosa (absence of ill will) > Samma (right view) > Amoha (absence of bewilderment) > Panna (wisdom) > Kusala (meritorious, good) > > Now, here is your message without all of the Pali: > > "Let me put it very bluntly, because B Bodhi forgets that the > absence of ill will is generosity. When the path factor becomes > right view, generosity will arise because of the absence of ill > will. In mundane path, the absence of ill will can arise with or > without wisdom. With every good behaviour (with or without wisdom) > the absence of bewilderment is already there. And that conditions > generosity in root > conditions. Even the four immeasurables have to arise with absence > of ill will as a root. With that understanding, generosity is taught > in the 8NP." > > Ken O, what are you talking about?? The absence of ill will isn't > automatically generosity; it could be equanimity, or metta, or joy, > or bliss…etc., etc., etc. You are making a false assumption. Not > only that, your use of Pali terms greatly oversimplifies the > matter. It appears to me that you have this idea that dhamma is > predominately a matter of simple Pali terms, almost like chess > pieces, and those with enough cunning (panna) will win the game. > Well, the dhamma isn't a game and there aren't any rules with simple > pieces to move around in a manner described by the Buddha. I > believe the dhamma is a complex business with infinite variables. > Knowing Pali and throwing the terms about indiscriminately doesn't > make one wise. > > Here we have B. Bodhi who gave a very detailed analysis of the > importance of generosity in the Buddhist's life, using examples from > the suttas and intelligent analysis, and you seem to think that you > can dismiss it all with a haphazard explosion of Pali terms. I hope > that I am not the only one who sees a problem with that. > > Ken O, frankly it seems to me that you are very unhappy lately, > perhaps for personal reasons, and you want to take it out on > others. Really, I hope I have compassion for you and > understanding. But that is not the way to handle the situation. > Try to follow what everyone has been telling you lately: confront > pessimism with optimism; confront a frown with a smile; confront > dukkha with nibbana. Hope I haven't been too personal. Good wishes > to you. ===== Perhaps I can help here. Here is my interpretation... Bhikkhu Bodhi made a statement, "Strictly speaking, giving does not appear in its own right among the factors of the Noble Eightfold Path...". Bhikkhu Bodhi then says that even though giving is not a path factor, it is an extremely part of Buddhism. Ken O is challenging Bhikkhu Bodhi's statement and is making a claim that giving does, in fact, appear as a path factor. In other words, Ken O says that giving is even more important than Bhikkhu Bodhi says it is. In other words, Bhikkhu Bodhi is saying that giving is "very important" while Ken O is saying that giving is "very, very important". In other words, Ken O isn't really challenging any of the points that Bhikkhu Bodhi made in his analysis... Ken O is agreeing, but even more so. Now let us consider the difference between Bhikkhu Bodhi and Ken O by analyzing the isse of "Does generosity appear in its own right as a factor of the Noble Eightfold Path?" [note that arguing that giving does not appear in its own right as a factor of the Noble Eightfold Path is not dismissing the importance of giving]. It appears as though Ken O dashed off a quick reply (something that I am often guilty of) and made a few typos (I am also guilty). Let me try to re-type Ken O's message to better understand his position (I will also insert English translations of Pali words): Ken O: Let me put it very bluntly, because B Bodhi forgets that adosa (non-aversion) is generosity. Rob M: I assume that this was a typo and Ken O really meant to say that alobha (non-attachment) is generosity. It is true that giving is one manifestation of alobha (renunciation is another). It is also true that non-aversion must arise together with giving because all wholesome mind states have both adosa (non-aversion) and alobha (non- attachment). Ken O: When the path factor becomes samma (right), generosity will arise because of adosa. Rob M: By definition, path factors are always samma (right). For example, we say "sammavaca" to mean "right speech". However, I am not clear as to which path factor Ken O is referring. I am not comfortable with saying that generosity arises "because of" adosa (or alobha). I think Ken O meant to say that generosity arises together with adosa and alobha. Ken O: In mundane path, adosa can arise with or without panna (wisdom). Rob M: I am assuming that "mundane path" means that when path factors arise singularly (as opposed to the supramundane mental states taking Nibbana as object where all path factors arise simultaneously). It is true that in all wholesome mental states, alobha and adosa can arise with or without panna (wisdom). As an aside, please note that four of the eight functional mental states which play the role of javana in an Arahant's thought process are without wisdom. Ken O: With every kusala behaviour (with or without panna) amoha is already there. Rob M: I am assuming another typo as amoha is the same as panna. I think that what Ken O is saying is that with every kusala behaviour (with or without wisdom) alobha / adosa are already there. Ken O: And that conditions generosity in root conditions. Rob M: I think that Ken O means to say that aloba / adosa are part of all kusala behaviours through root condition. Again, I have a problem with the idea that generosity arises because of aloba or adosa. I prefer to say that generosity arises together with alobha and adosa. Ken O: Even the four immeasurables have to arise with adosa as a root. Rob M: The four immeasurables are metta, karuna, mudita and upekkha. As these are all wholesome, by definition, they all include alobha and adosa as roots. Ken O: With that understanding, generosity is taught in the 8NP. Rob M: Now I am really confused. Perhaps what Ken O is trying to say is that all wholesome mental states are part of sammavayama (right effort). Since generosity is a wholesome mental state, it is part of right effort. I now return to Bhikkhu Bodhi's statement, "Strictly speaking, giving does not appear in its own right among the factors of the Noble Eightfold Path...". After having considered Ken O's statements, I still cannot conclude that giving appears in its own right among the factors of the Noble Eightfold Path. Ken O, I have probably misinterpreted one or more of your statements. Please help me to understand better. James, a few months ago, I had the pleasure of a dinner with Ken O. He was charming and intelligent... deeply commited to understanding and sharing the Dhamma. James, I share your compassion. Metta, Rob M :-) 39308 From: plnao Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 3:55pm Subject: Lodewijk's speech - anusayas (was Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts ) ??Hello Nina, and all Nina, I have really enjoyed reading and rereading Lodewijk's speech. I hope I have a chance to meet him someday. I've already heard such good things about him from Dhamma friends here who have met him, and the more I read of him the more fondness and respect I feel for him. I keep associating him with Dag Hammerskjold in my mind, to tell you the truth, because of his diplomatic background! Dag Hammerskjold is a hero of mine! N: I give you part of Lodewijk's address to the 120 Bhikkhus in Sarnath Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 4:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi Howard and Ken, Maybe you guys should just forget dependent arising for a while. It is just confusing you. The only way desire could know feeling as a reality is if panna cetasika accompanied desire. There are only two objects of knowing, concept and reality. There is no other possibility. If desire doesn't know its object as a reality, it must know it as a concept. Simple as that. Using the same reasoning we can say only concept can condition desire. Any way of generalizing or bringing together particulars into a seeming whole is a conceptual knowing, like visual perception, for example. Any recognition must be conceptual because it is equating the present with concept. However, unlike realities, concept manifests only as object of consciousness and cetasikas. In this sense concept is inseparable from reality, the middle way. Furthermore concept must at all times reference reality in some way. Otherwise it is only meaningless intimation rupa. I don't understand why you guys are resisting this concept so much. Try an experiment. The next time a desire arises consider that the object of that desire is only a concept. See if that seems reasonable and, if so, what happens to the desire? Larry 39310 From: Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 5:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Mike: "I think you're right--I've just been reading this and and can't think of a better or more concentrated example of abhidhamma in the suttas than the ninety-three paragraphs of the Nidaanavagga ('The Kindred Sayings on Cause' per Mrs. Rhys-Davies). Can anyone recommend a better English translation?" Hi Mike, I think B. Bodhi's trans. of SN is excellent and well worth the investment. Also Thanissaro Bhikkhu translated some of it for ATI. Larry 39311 From: Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 0:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi, Larry - In a message dated 12/4/04 7:49:42 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Howard and Ken, > > Maybe you guys should just forget dependent arising for a while. It is > just confusing you. > ------------------------------------- Howard: Gosh, thanks, Larry ;-) ------------------------------------- The only way desire could know feeling as a reality> > is if panna cetasika accompanied desire. > -------------------------------------- Howard: Larry, if you want to apply the foregoing to tanha, then you could just as well apply it to vi~n~nana. Would you also care to say that vi~n~nana could know feeling as a reality (i.e., not as a concept) only when accompanied by pa~n~na? So, without wisdom, there is no direct awareness of feelings? I think you are just plain wrong on this, Larry. Without even a glimmer of wisdom, we are directly aware of feelings, sights, sounds, tastes, smells, and so on. All of the foregoing, directly apprehended, are paramattha dhammas, not concepts, but even so they are misapprehended due to ignorance. They are realities that are direct objects of our awareness, and they are not concepts. Yet avijja causes them to be misapprehended. Avijja certainly does have a fundamental effect. There is something added on to all our cognitive functions: the sense of a split into self-existent subject and self-existent object. That reification is engendered by ignorance, it grows embryonically in the womb of sankhara, it is born into vi~n~nana, and continues on its way from there. Incidentally, I find it strange to speak of desire knowing an object, and I didn't speak in such terms. More about that further on. ----------------------------------- There are only two objects of> > knowing, concept and reality. There is no other possibility. If desire > doesn't know its object as a reality, it must know it as a concept. ---------------------------------- Howard: I never speak of desire knowing something. Perhaps you are comfortable with such locution, but it is meaningless to me. Mental content, object of consciousness, arises that is pleasant, and then there arises desire for that pleasantness. Vi~n~nana knows, vedana feels, sa~n~na recognizes, and tanha desires. ---------------------------------- > Simple as that. Using the same reasoning we can say only concept can > condition desire. > ---------------------------------- Howard: I never read the Buddha to have said that. --------------------------------- Any way of generalizing or bringing together> > particulars into a seeming whole is a conceptual knowing, like visual > perception, for example. ------------------------------- Howard: How do you view phassa? Isn't that a bringing together of particulars? The Buddha said so. So is phassa conceptual? ------------------------------ Any recognition must be conceptual because it> > is equating the present with concept. ---------------------------- Howard: Recognition, even of paramattha dhammas, does require processing. Is that enough to make it conceptual? I don't think so. You know, Larry, in that regard, I don't believe you ever replied to my point that the khandha of sa~n~na is separate from sanharakkhandha in which the conceptual faculty is found. --------------------------- > > However, unlike realities, concept manifests only as object of > consciousness and cetasikas. In this sense concept is inseparable from > reality, the middle way. Furthermore concept must at all times reference > reality in some way. Otherwise it is only meaningless intimation rupa. > ------------------------------------- Howard: Sorry. At this point my eyes are glazing over from over-medication of Abhidhamma. ;-) ----------------------------------- > > I don't understand why you guys are resisting this concept so much. > ------------------------------------ Howard: I'm resisting concept!!!??? I'm one of the few folks on DSG to emphasize the *importance* of concept! ------------------------------------ Try> > an experiment. The next time a desire arises consider that the object of > that desire is only a concept. See if that seems reasonable and, if so, > what happens to the desire? ------------------------------------- Howard: Sorry , Larry. There is immediate desire and there is subsequent desire. When there is a good feeling I immediately desire it, wordlessly and without concept. The mind is programmed by ignorance to react so. The object of that immediate desire, whether it be the pleasant feeling itself or the bodily sensation that was felt as pleasant, is a reality, not a concept. However, should I then begin to think about it, conceptually proliferating, a secondary object will appear, a concept substituted for the reality, and a secondary craving will arise as well. -------------------------------------- > > Larry > > ================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39312 From: m. nease Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 6:25pm Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi Ken and Hugo, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ken O" To: Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 10:16 AM Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) > I have the same problem with you about anger. I think my wife always > complained I am quick in temper. A short temper's always been a curse to me to, I earlier recommended Aghatasutta, AN X 80 to Hugo. > And I know the only way that anger > is looking it at it is wise attention (understand it as anatta, > anicca and dukkha). Right--I think this quotation from "Discourse on the Twofold Thought" (Middle Length Sayings I, no. 19) in Nina's 'Cetasikas' at http://www.ready2surf.co.uk/cetfinal.html is pertinent: "It is difficult to cultivate kusala vitakka but the Buddha showed that it can be done. Further on in the sutta we read about three kinds of kusala vitakka which are the opposites of the three kinds of akusala vitakka. They are: the thought of renunciation (nekkhamma) the thought of non-malevolence (avyåpåda) the thought of non-harming (avihiósa) The bodhisatta realized that these lead neither to self-hurt, nor to the hurt of others, nor to the hurt of both, but that they are for "growth in intuitive wisdom", that they are "not associated with distress", "conducive to nibbåna". We read about kusala vitakka: "Monks, if a monk ponder and reflect much on the thought of renunciation he ejects the thought of sense-pleasures; if he makes much of the thought of renunciation, his mind inclines to the thought of renunciation. Monks, if a monk ponder and reflect much on the thought of non-malevolence he ejects the thought of malevolence¤ Monks, if a monk ponder and reflect much on the thought of non-harming, he ejects the thought of harming; if he makes much of the thought of non-harming his mind inclines to the thought of non-harming" I think this sutta shows well how wise attention differs from unwise attention in this context and the difference these conditions can make to the present moment." > My preference is to use anatta as it eradicates > the I more effectively so lessen the concept that there is an I that > is angry. I agree with this in principle. Years ago though, when I was doing a LOT of meditation as an ordained layman in a Thai wat, someone told me to 'look at the dosa--find the tilakkhaana'--this is an opportunity for insight'. So I spent a lot of time 'looking at dosa and the more I looked, the more I found--which leads me to another portion of Nina's quotation: ... Monks, if a monk ponder and reflect much on the thought of malevolence, he ejects the thought of non-malevolence, his mind inclines to the thought of malevolence. Monks, if a monk ponder and reflect much on the thought of harming, he ejects the thought of non-harming; if he makes much of the thought of harming, his mind inclines to the thought of harming. ... In short, for myself, I found 'looking for the tilakkhaana' in dosa counterproductive. Just me, of course. > There is no other way I think can be more beneficial than > using wise attention. My (tentative) conclusion here was that the conscious effort to evoke yonisoo manasikaara was not effective for me; in other words, I found that 'I' CAN'T use wise attention--'I' can't arise with unwise attention. But at times, reflecting on what Nina called 'kusala vitakka', the words of the Buddha, even though conceptual, whether "What should I expect?" from Aghatasutta or "But while I was reflecting, "It conduces to self-hurt", it subsided; and while I was reflecting, "It conduces to the hurt of others", it subsided; and while I was reflecting, "It is destructive of intuitive wisdom, it is associated with distress, it is not conducive to nibbaana", it subsided." from Discourse on the Twofold Thought, these reflections on present dhammas in the light of the pariyatti were conditions for detachment and relief from domanassa. Of course, that doesn't mean that akusala was replaced by kusala--more likely always that unpleasant akusala was replaced by pleasant akusala (i.e. attachment to pleasant thoughts). This is why I think it's always a good idea to investigate what I take to be kusala with the conceptual tools of abhidhamma. > The problem with anger is sometimes the > intensity or it is out of nowhere it arise strongly, these are due to > our strong underlying tendency (habitual effect since limitless > lives). When that kind of anger arise, I feelt that I am ovewhelm, > and my wise attention did not help much because my panna is not > strong enough to eradicate the underlying tendency. I often feel the same way--then sometimes I think, 'It's the nature of 'I' to be overwhelmed, no 'my' wise attention and no 'my' pa~n~naa'--'I' and 'my' can't arise with wise attention OR pa~n~aa'. And with this thought, sometimes, 'my' aversion to 'my' hindrances to 'my' understanding subside--"what should I expect"? So, a little more kammic relief--kusala? 'I'm' suspicious... But at least I'm not mistaking this relief for bona fide vipassanaa which, as I understand it, must be into paramattha dhammas and not concepts, however kusala. > If I think I > have reach a certain limit on my wise attention which is not strong > enough to help me tide over it, the best sutta I known to recollect > at that moment is Kakacupaama Sutta MN 21. I read it once in a > while to remind myself. I know many times I lose to myself to anger, > but I accept. It is important not to be remoseful over it because > remorse is dosa rooted which in turns conditioned the underlying > tendency (dont add wood into the fire). I couldn't agree more. Those of us who don't experience habitual dosa (and its attendant domanassa) to goad them I think sometimes understimate the value of this kind of kammic relief to those of us who do. > I think Phil is good at this. His experiences in eradicating dosa > using wise attention on that moment it arise, is very good. I learn > a lot from his experiences when he share in the list. I do too, and I think Phil's recent reminder about apamaada is also important in this context as a condition for the arising of yonisoo manasikaara. I'm beginning to like 'vigilance' over 'heedfulness' or 'earnestness'. mike p.s. Thanks for the Kakacupaama Sutta--I'll have another look. 39313 From: m. nease Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 6:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi Larry, ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2004 5:16 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O > I think B. Bodhi's trans. of SN is excellent and well worth the > investment. Also Thanissaro Bhikkhu translated some of it for ATI. Mercy! I didn't realize he'd translated it, probably just forgot or transposed nikayas in my head. Thanks! mike 39314 From: gazita2002 Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 6:42pm Subject: I'm back Hello friends, Letting you know I'm back home and, altho a tad sore, I'm fine. Thanking you all for your kind thoughts and words; I haven't caught up with all the posts since being out of action and I can see there are HEAPS!!!! Dhamma does help in these rather scary situations. To let go [kind of..] and know that there is nothing that can stop any vipakacitta from arising, just like now, is somehow releasing. Except, of course, when one is still throwing up 30 hours after anaesthetic ;-( Right now, I'm fine and looking forward to reading posts again. May we all be well and happy, Azita. 39315 From: m. nease Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 6:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi Larry, ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 4:27 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O > L: I would say D.O. is about delusion, the reality of delusion. Every > link is a mistake. Every link is real, I think. > Moha is not a universal cetasika but sanna is. Yes-- > Sanna > perceives everything as a concept, even anatta. Concept is the beginning > and end of all delusion. This works well with some schools of Buddhism, I think, but not with the Paali texts. I could be mistaken of course--I'd like to see a reference supporting this idea from the Paali tipitaka. > If you understand sanna you can see _how_ > delusion arises. I don't think you can say the same about moha. Sa.n.naa is present even with lokkuttara cittas, as I understand it. In the mind door, it can even take moha as an object I think. Anyway, it doesn't 'perceive everything as a concept', I don't think--am I wrong about this? Sa.n.naa is present whether the object is pa.n.natti or paramattha, isn't it? I don't see it as perceiving 'as'--just as perceiving. In other words, I don't think sa.n.naa 'creates' concepts--do you? mike 39316 From: m. nease Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 7:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi Larry and Ken, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ken O" To: Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 7:28 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O > The root of the problem is not conceptualization, the root of the > problem is the three roots that conditioned these conceptualizations. > They are the source. That is why the first thing to eradicate > during stream entry is the eradication of a view to self. To me > because of the attachment to the view of a self, we keep > conceptualization the world, again to me our conceptualization in > this world in one way or another is conditioned by the 'I' factor. Parenthetically: In my experience, one of the greatest obstacles to understanding has been taking insights into concepts as vipassanaa. Speaking strictly for myself, this has certainly led me in the past to think that 'concepts are the root of evil'. Don't know if this is pertinent to anyone else. Interesting reflection, though. All--ALL--of 'my' 'insights' have just been noodling, thinking. I have yet to scratch the surface of the Buddhadhamma. mike 39317 From: Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 7:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi Howard, I think we have taken this argument as far as it will go for now. However, there is one question I didn't understand. H: "You know, Larry, in that regard, I don't believe you ever replied to my point that the khandha of sa~n~na is separate from sanharakkhandha in which the conceptual faculty is found." L: What conceptual faculty? I agree that the two khandhas are two, not one, but they arise and function together. Are you referring to sankhara cetasikas' characteristic of accumulating, combining? Or are you talking about ditthi or vitakka and vicara? Or something else? Larry 39318 From: robmoult Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 7:35pm Subject: Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi All, Many on this list attach great importance to the terms "concept" and "reality". Many feel that this issue is central to a proper understanding of the Dhamma. I decided to read what the Buddha and Buddhaghosa said about this topic. Here is the results of my quick literature search (I checked the detailed indicies in the back of the following texts for "concept", "reality" and "pannatti"): Digha Nikaya (648 pages) - Not found (except in one footnote) Majjhima Nikaya (1412 pages) - Not found Samyutta Nikaya (2074 pages) - Not found Anguttara Nikaya (330 pages) - Not found Dhammasamgani (364 pages) - Not found (except in introductory essay and one footnote) Atthasalini (555 pages) - Not found Vibhanga (573 pages) - Not found Sammohavinodani (741 pages) - Not found Even Buddhaghosa's 885 page Visuddhi Magga has only five references to "concept" (plus another 7 references in footnotes) and three references to "reality". My quick literature search covered more than 7500 pages of primary texts. From this quick literature search, I am coming to the conclusion that "concept" and "reality" is not a central theme of the Buddha's teaching. Comments? Metta, Rob M :-) 39319 From: m. nease Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 7:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Rob, Very interesting and trenchant-- ----- Original Message ----- From: "robmoult" To: Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2004 7:35 PM Subject: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts > My quick literature search covered more than 7500 pages of primary > texts. From this quick literature search, I am coming to the > conclusion that "concept" and "reality" is not a central theme of > the Buddha's teaching. I agree--the only central theme, to my understanding, is dukkha and the end of dukkha. That said, though, do you think there's any significant difference between the foundations of mindfulness and concepts? That is, do you think that satipa.t.thaana can arise based equally on either? If not, it hardly seems important to me whether or not 'concept and reality' is a central theme; it suffices, for me, that understanding the difference is crucial to understanding the central theme. What do you think? mike 39320 From: Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 8:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi Mike, re: L: "Sanna perceives everything as a concept, even anatta. Concept is the beginning and end of all delusion." M: "This works well with some schools of Buddhism, I think, but not with the Paali texts. I could be mistaken of course--I'd like to see a reference supporting this idea from the Paali tipitaka." L: See Vism.XIV,130: "But though classed in the same way as consciousness, nevertheless, as to characteristic, etc., it all has just the characteristic of perceiving. Its function is to make a sign as a condition for perceiving again that 'this is the same', as carpenters, etc., do in the case of timber, and so on. It is manifested as the action of interpreting by means of the sign as apprehended, like the blind who 'see' an elephant (Ud. 68-69). Its proximate cause is an objective field in whatever way that appears, like the perception that arises in fauns that see scarecrows as men." L: "Sign" is concept I believe. As for concept being the "beginning and end of all delusion", failure to 'see' the three characteristics and understand the Four Noble Truths could reasonably be said to be an error of complex judgement but the following definition of pa~n~na suggests to me that it is simply a matter if concept vs. reality, which amounts to sa~n~naa vs. pa~n~na, in my mind. Vism.XIV,7 "What are its characteristic, function, manifestation and proximate cause? Understanding has the characteristic of penetrating the individual essences of states. Its function is to abolish the darkness of delusion, which conceals the individual essences of states. It is manifested as non-delusion. Because of the words 'One who is concentrated knows and see correctly' (A.v,3), its proximate cause is concentration." L: Granted pa~n~na doesn't abolish sa~n~naa but sa~n~naa does very plainly conceal sabhava. Pa~n~na abolishes the belief or clinging to concept and sa~n~naa interprets all experience conceptually. That sa~n~naa arises with lokuttara cetasikas suggests to me that path consciousness is not void of concept. The point of path process is not to "get real" but to stop desiring. So it seems reasonable that concept would be involved in that insight. I don't see a problem with nibbana being an object of sa~n~na. That conceptualizing of nibbana is surely instrumental in the understanding to the effect that the path is completed. Larry 39321 From: Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 3:29pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi, Larry - In a message dated 12/4/04 10:34:48 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I think we have taken this argument as far as it will go for now. > However, there is one question I didn't understand. > > H: "You know, Larry, in that regard, I don't believe you ever replied to > my point that the khandha of sa~n~na is separate from sanharakkhandha in > which the conceptual faculty is found." > > L: What conceptual faculty? I agree that the two khandhas are two, not > one, but they arise and function together. Are you referring to sankhara > cetasikas' characteristic of accumulating, combining? Or are you talking > about ditthi or vitakka and vicara? Or something else? > > Larry > =========================== I'm talking about thinking and concept formation. (You may choose any and all Pali terms that apply.) It comes under sankharakkhanda. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39322 From: Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 8:29pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Rob: "My quick literature search covered more than 7500 pages of primary texts. From this quick literature search, I am coming to the conclusion that "concept" and "reality" is not a central theme of the Buddha's teaching." Hi Rob, Is self real or imaginary? Larry 39323 From: Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 8:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Howard: "I'm talking about thinking and concept formation. (You may choose any and all Pali terms that apply.) It comes under sankharakkhanda." Hi Howard, I agree discursive thinking and language formation are different from sa~n~naa. I suppose we could classify them under clinging (upadana).Sankhara cetasikas have both a combining (accumulating) and proliferating quality which I don't understand. Also I don't understand the source of language or how it works and the precise relation to sa~n~naa in all this. Larry 39324 From: Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 3:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi, Rob - In a message dated 12/4/04 10:37:46 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > > Hi All, > > Many on this list attach great importance to the terms "concept" > and "reality". Many feel that this issue is central to a proper > understanding of the Dhamma. > > I decided to read what the Buddha and Buddhaghosa said about this > topic. Here is the results of my quick literature search (I checked > the detailed indicies in the back of the following texts > for "concept", "reality" and "pannatti"): > > Digha Nikaya (648 pages) > - Not found (except in one footnote) > > Majjhima Nikaya (1412 pages) > - Not found > > Samyutta Nikaya (2074 pages) > - Not found > > Anguttara Nikaya (330 pages) > - Not found > > Dhammasamgani (364 pages) > - Not found (except in introductory essay and one footnote) > > Atthasalini (555 pages) > - Not found > > Vibhanga (573 pages) > - Not found > > Sammohavinodani (741 pages) > - Not found > > Even Buddhaghosa's 885 page Visuddhi Magga has only five references > to "concept" (plus another 7 references in footnotes) and three > references to "reality". > > My quick literature search covered more than 7500 pages of primary > texts. From this quick literature search, I am coming to the > conclusion that "concept" and "reality" is not a central theme of > the Buddha's teaching. > > Comments? > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > =========================== Yes, a few comments. First of all: Yay!! ;-)) Secondly, you have just supported a point long made by James and Victor and others. Also, while I do think that our erroneous concepts, those defiled by the ignorance of "me and mine", of permanent, self-existent "things", of "cores", and of "selves" are the primary carriers of avijja and are among the strongest of the chains that bind, I agree that the Buddha did not teach the concept vs reality issue as a primary one. Now, I do think that one can validly distinguish between experience that is mentally constructed and direct, sankharically-unconstructed experience, and I note that the Buddha did distinguish between sammuti sacca and paramattha sacca, and that all branches of Buddhism make this distinction. However, I think that what the Buddha most emphasized are the four noble truths, dependent origination and the general theme of conditionality, the tilakkhana, and, perhaps above all, relinquishment and his unique tripartite path of practice leading to enlightenment and liberation. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39325 From: buddhatrue Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 9:03pm Subject: Re: Concept and Reality in Primary Texts --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: I am coming to the > conclusion that "concept" and "reality" is not a central theme of > the Buddha's teaching. > > Comments? > > Metta, > Rob M :-) Friend Rob M, Hope I don't sound too `snorky' (Hi Phil! ;-), but I came to that conclusion some time ago (you also??). Here is my take on the subject: the `reality' vs. `concept' outlook is the thinking person's approach to the dhamma. A quick and easy way to appear to see the impermanence, non-self, and dukkha aspect of conditioned reality is to tell the mind that everything, except component dhammas, is concept only. People: concepts; cars: concepts; trees, concepts; etc., etc., etc. This approach gets the thinking person all excited that true understanding of the Buddha's teaching has arisen. Now, to me, I look at this approach and say to myself, "So what. Who cares? What difference does it make? Let's get to the real heart of the matter: the defilements in one's own mind." You see, the thinking person doesn't want to confront his/her demons. The thinking person doesn't want to stir up the sludge and filth of the mind to see what's there. It's much cleaner and easier, including easier to discuss, to put on a façade of viewing everything as concepts. However, I think that when one truly practices the Four Foundations of Mindfulness, this approach will break down. Secluded from outside sensations, viewing the body in the body, the mind in the mind, the feelings in the feelings, and the mental objects in the mental objects, a concept only approach doesn't make any sense anymore. Concepts can only be called concepts when they are compared to something else, something that is supposedly non-concept. But when there is nothing to compare to, the approach of `concept' vs. `reality' flies out the window. Well, at least that's my take on it…and what do I know? I'm only a concept ;-)). Metta, James 39326 From: Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 4:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi, Larry (and Rob) - In a message dated 12/4/04 11:30:41 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Rob: "My quick literature search covered more than 7500 pages of primary > texts. From this quick literature search, I am coming to the conclusion > that "concept" and "reality" is not a central theme of the Buddha's > teaching." > > Hi Rob, > > Is self real or imaginary? > > Larry > ======================= "Self" is delusive concept, with no instances. "Dukkha" is undelusive concept. There are no selves, there is dukkha. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39327 From: Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 4:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi, Larry - In a message dated 12/4/04 11:52:15 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > > Howard: "I'm talking about thinking and concept formation. (You may > choose any and all Pali terms that apply.) It comes under > sankharakkhanda." > > Hi Howard, > > I agree discursive thinking and language formation are different from > sa~n~naa. I suppose we could classify them under clinging > (upadana). > ---------------------------------- Howard: I don't see that (about upadana). But I do see thinking, concept construction, and language processing as falling under the formational khandha, sankhara. ---------------------------------- Sankhara cetasikas have both a combining (accumulating) and> > proliferating quality which I don't understand. Also I don't understand > the source of language or how it works and the precise relation to > sa~n~naa in all this. > --------------------------------- Howard: I don't understand any of this in any detail. It is very complex. I do think that sa~n~na creates the raw materials upon which thinking and conceptual construction operate. ------------------------------- > > Larry ================ With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39328 From: Bhante Vimalaramsi Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 8:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Dhamma Greetings Andrew, I can show you some examples of how a smile with loving and kind thoughts changes others minds. Over the years I have been invited to visit many people who have terrible disease and are on their death beds. Before I go into the dying persons room I spent time by myself smiling and wishing everyone concerned with the dying person a calm, accepting mind that is open to these loving, compassionate thoughts. Then I go into the room of the often times heavy physical pain, where the dying person is lying. I keep my mind on uplifting thoughts like metta and when the dying person sees me they begin to smile. They have told me that whenever I walk into their room it is like fresh air coming into the room that before had felt stuffy. Even if the dying person is in great physical and mental pain, they begin to have a mind that is more accepting of their situation. This is not my belief that this is happening, it is real because that is what I am told, by both the family and the dying person. Why do you think that this happens? It all starts with a sincere smile and a wish for their well being. Most of the time I teach the dying person how to practice meditation and how to see pain as a part of an impersonal process. The relief that they experience when I walk into the room is truly amazing. I have a definition in practical terms for the word compassion and it is 'Seeing another person suffering (either mentally or physically), allowing them the space to experience that suffering and love them unconditionally'. I say allowing the suffering person to have the space to suffer means that their pain is their's I can't help by trying to take their pain away. That only makes me suffer and doesn't help the person who has the real suffering. I also teach that loving-kindness means loving-acceptance of the present moment. Which also means to give the space for even painful feelings to be there without any resistance at all. I have just given you a descriptive example of many true life experiences and how by my smiling it does change another persons views of what is happening in the present moment. Does smiling lead directly to nibbana? The answer is no, but it sure helps to relieve the suffering in myself and others. Also, when I go to hospitals to visit people they ask me to chant a blessing for them and when I do this they can feel the tranquility coming off of me and they then become tranquil. If you want to change the world around you try smiling from the heart, it does work. And it only works when the smile is sincere. Maha-Metta always Bhante Vimalaramsi 39329 From: Bhante Vimalaramsi Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 8:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Dhamma Greetings James, Have you ever run across a book called 'Concepts and Reality' by Venerable Nananada? It is worth a read, if you have the time and inclination. Many bhikkhus place a great deal interest on this book. Maha-Metta always Bhante Vimalaramsi 39330 From: robmoult Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 10:39pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Venerable Sir, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Bhante Vimalaramsi wrote: > Dhamma Greetings James, > > Have you ever run across a book called 'Concepts and Reality' by > Venerable Nananada? It is worth a read, if you have the time and > inclination. Many bhikkhus place a great deal interest on this book. > > Maha-Metta > always > Bhante Vimalaramsi ===== I read this book some time ago and pulled it out when you referenced it in your post. I quote from the Preface: The analysis of the naure of concepts constitutes an imporant facet of the Buddhist doctrine of Anatta ('not-self'). Buddhism traces the idea of a soul to a fundamental error in understanding the facts of experience. This ignorance (avijja) is reflected to a great extent in the words and concepts in worldly parlance. Being unaware of their limitations, man is generally prone to cling to them dogmatically and this accounts for a good deal of complications in his intellectual and emotional life. Hence an understanding of the nature of concepts as such is a preliminary step in the spiritual endeavour in Buddhism. The Buddha's teachings on this particular aspect of our phenomenal existence can best be appreciated with the aid of the two key-words, 'papanca' and 'papanca-sanna-sankha', an evaluation of which is the aim of this work. I wholehartedly agree with Bhikkhu Nanananda that conceptual proliferation (my translation of 'papanca' and 'papanca-sanna- sankha') is a critical element of Buddhism. However, I contend that the separating of "concept" and "reality" in an ontological fashion is not a key element of the Buddha's teachings. In other words, "conceptual proliferation" vs. "directly knowing" is very important whereas "conceptual object" vs. "real object" is not a key element. My thinking has, in part, been influenced by the Mulapariya Sutta (Mn 1) wherein the Buddha expains the difference in pattern of thinking between the uninstructed worldling (that's us), the learner (Sotapanna, Sakadagami and Anagami), the Arahant and the Buddha. To summarize this complex sutta in a few words: - We perceive then conceive, taking delight because we have not fully understood the object - Learners directly know and may or may not conceive, they should not take delight so that they may fully understand the object - Arahants directly know and do not conceive because they have uprooted the three evil roots - Buddha directly knows and does not conceive because He has fully understood the object to the end and because He has understood dependent origination It is noteworthy that in this sutta, the Buddha lists 24 objects that can be perceived/conceived/directly known. The 24 objects are: - Earth / water / fire / air - Beings / Gods - Pajapati / Brahma / Gods of Streaming Radiance / Gods of Refulgent Glory / Gods of Abundant Fruit / Vanquishers - Base of infinite space / base of infinite consciousness / base of nothingness / base of neither perception nor non-perception - The seen / the heard / the sensed / the cognized - Unity / diversity / all / Nibbana The Sutta treats all of these object in exactly the same way, even though some of the objects would fall into the Abhidhammattaha Sangaha category of "concept" while others would fall into the Abhidhammattaha Sangaha category of "reality". Though the title of Bhikkhu Nanananda's book is "Concept and Reality in Early Buddhist Thought", this book (as indicated in the preface) is a study on conceptual proliferation. In addition to the title, the term "reality" is briefy mentioned only four times in this 150 page book (one of the references is in the chapter titled "Prapanca in Mahayana Buddhism"). The Pali term "paramattha" is not in the index of this book. With great respect, Rob M :-) 39331 From: robmoult Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 10:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Mike, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "m. nease" wrote: > Hi Rob, > > Very interesting and trenchant-- > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "robmoult" > To: > Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2004 7:35 PM > Subject: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts > > My quick literature search covered more than 7500 pages of primary > > texts. From this quick literature search, I am coming to the > > conclusion that "concept" and "reality" is not a central theme of > > the Buddha's teaching. > > I agree--the only central theme, to my understanding, is dukkha and the end > of dukkha. That said, though, do you think there's any significant > difference between the foundations of mindfulness and concepts? That is, do > you think that satipa.t.thaana can arise based equally on either? If not, > it hardly seems important to me whether or not 'concept and reality' is a > central theme; it suffices, for me, that understanding the difference is > crucial to understanding the central theme. What do you think? > > mike > ===== Please see my recent reply to Bhante Vimalaramsi. I tend to equate satipatthana with "directly knowing". Metta, Rob M :-) 39332 From: robmoult Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 11:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Larry, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > Rob: "My quick literature search covered more than 7500 pages of primary > texts. From this quick literature search, I am coming to the conclusion > that "concept" and "reality" is not a central theme of the Buddha's > teaching." > > Hi Rob, > > Is self real or imaginary? ===== Please see my recent reply to Bhante Vimalaramsi. Please note that "beings" is one of the types of objects taken by all types of people (uninstructed worldlings, learners, Arahants and Buddha). Metta, Rob M :-) 39333 From: Andrew Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 11:31pm Subject: Re: Concept and Reality in Primary Texts --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > > Hi All, > > Many on this list attach great importance to the terms "concept" > and "reality". Many feel that this issue is central to a proper > understanding of the Dhamma. > > I decided to read what the Buddha and Buddhaghosa said about this > topic. Here is the results of my quick literature search (I checked > the detailed indicies in the back of the following texts > for "concept", "reality" and "pannatti"): [snip]> My quick literature search covered more than 7500 pages of primary > texts. From this quick literature search, I am coming to the > conclusion that "concept" and "reality" is not a central theme of > the Buddha's teaching. > > Comments? Hi Rob M I seem to recall you did something similar to this before to which myself and others responded? Anyway, you have asked for comments so here goes. I have just done a quick literature search of Swedish novels and, because I did not find the word "lonely" very often, I am going to conclude that "loneliness" is not a central theme of Swedish literature. Would I be right? Certainly not. I believe it is an error to conclude that quantitative language searches always translate to qualitative ranking. Big mistake IMHO. Because of the anatta and anicca teachings, the Buddha *had* to say something like this: "Though the wise one has transcended the conceived, he might still say 'I speak'. He might say too 'they speak to me'. Skilful, knowing the world's parlance, he uses such terms as mere expressions" [SN II 17]. I for one completely understand why the Buddha didn't go on and on about the presently-arisen realities behind the "mere expressions" he was using. Have you ever had an extended Dhamma discussion with someone who constantly tells you to think of things in terms of paramattha dhammas rather than the "ocean of concepts" we all float around in? The results of your search: A. don't surprise me in the least, and B. don't make me feel that directly knowing the substance behind our "mere expressions" is not a central part of the Dhamma. The important things are often hidden away from view, don't you think? Well, perhaps you don't ...? My two cents worth. (-: Best wishes Andrew 39334 From: robmoult Date: Sat Dec 4, 2004 11:45pm Subject: Re: Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi James, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" > wrote: > > I am coming to the > > conclusion that "concept" and "reality" is not a central theme of > > the Buddha's teaching. > > > > Comments? > > > > Metta, > > Rob M :-) > > Friend Rob M, > > Hope I don't sound too `snorky' (Hi Phil! ;-), but I came to that > conclusion some time ago (you also??). > > Here is my take on the subject: the `reality' vs. `concept' outlook > is the thinking person's approach to the dhamma. A quick and easy > way to appear to see the impermanence, non-self, and dukkha aspect > of conditioned reality is to tell the mind that everything, except > component dhammas, is concept only. People: concepts; cars: > concepts; trees, concepts; etc., etc., etc. This approach gets the > thinking person all excited that true understanding of the Buddha's > teaching has arisen. Now, to me, I look at this approach and say to > myself, "So what. Who cares? What difference does it make? Let's > get to the real heart of the matter: the defilements in one's own > mind." > > You see, the thinking person doesn't want to confront his/her > demons. The thinking person doesn't want to stir up the sludge and > filth of the mind to see what's there. ===== And non-thinking people are not subject to the same tendecies? :-) ===== > It's much cleaner and > easier, including easier to discuss, to put on a façade of viewing > everything as concepts. However, I think that when one truly > practices the Four Foundations of Mindfulness, this approach will > break down. Secluded from outside sensations, viewing the body in > the body, the mind in the mind, the feelings in the feelings, and > the mental objects in the mental objects, a concept only approach > doesn't make any sense anymore. Concepts can only be called > concepts when they are compared to something else, something that is > supposedly non-concept. But when there is nothing to compare to, > the approach of `concept' vs. `reality' flies out the window. Well, > at least that's my take on it…and what do I know? I'm only a > concept ;-)). ===== I have a slightly different take on it. As I see it, this ontological focus on "reality" vs. "concept" really started to take hold in the Abhidhammattha Sangaha fifteen centuries after the death of the Buddha. One must not forget the stated purpose of the Abhidhammattha Sangaha - it is meant to be an introductory text to the Abhidhamma. Bhikkhu Bodhi's introduction says: Among these [compendia of the Abhidhamma], the work that has dominated Abhidhamma studies from about the twelfth century to the present day is the first mentioned, the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, "The Compendium of Things contained in the Abhidhamma." Its popularity may be accounted for by its remarkable balance between concision and comprehensiveness. Within its short scope all the essentials of the Abhidhamma are briefly and carefully summarized. Although the book's manner of treatment is extremely terse even to the point of obscurity when read alone, when studied under a qualified teacher or with the aid of an explanatory guide, it leads the student confidently through the winding maze of the system to a clear perception of its entire structure. For this reason throughout the Theravada Buddhist world the Abhidhammattha Sangaha is always used as the first textbook in Abhidhamma studies. In Buddhist monasteries, especially in Burma, novices and young bhikkhus are required to learn the Sangaha by heart before they are permitted to study the books of the Abhidhamma Pitaka and its Commentaries. The second verse of the Abhidhammattha Sangaha (following the opening words of praise) is as follows: The things contained in the Abhidhamma, spoken of therein, are altogether fourfold from the standpoint of ultimate reality: consciousness, mental factors, matter and Nibbana. After reviewing many of the original Abhidhamma texts, I am starting to interpret Acariya Anuruddha's statement as meaning that his he using the approach of four ultimate realities as a convenient technique to summarize the vast content of the Abhidhamma. Also note that Acariya Anuruddha only used the term "paramattha" (ultimate reality) twice in the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, once in the verse quoted above, and once in conclusion of the sixth chapter. I have huge respect for Acariya Anuruddha's Abhidhammattha Sangaha. As Bhikkhu Bodi says in his introduction: In nine short chapters occupying about fifty pages in print, the author provides a masterly summary of that abstruse body of Buddhist doctrine called the Abhidhamma. My estimate is that the Abhidhamma texts plus commentary run to about ten thousand pages. To summarize this into fifty pages is an unbelieveable accomplishment. The only way that such a compression could have been done would have been to introduce a new simple structure to act as a skeleton. I now see "ultimate realities" in that light. In other words, ultimate realities are an incredibly powerful tool but they are not key to the Buddha's teaching. Personally, my approach has been to get comfortable with the Abhidhammattha Sangaha first and then start to go into the primary texts for an even better understanding. Until I started to go into the primary texts, I too chanted the "concept" vs. "reality" mantra. My deepening understanding of the Abhidhamma does not diminish my respect for the Abhidhammattha Sangaha at all, in fact, my respect has increased! Yesterday, I was wrestling with the Patthana (Conditional Relations) and I still can't make head nor tail of the structure of the text. Metta, Rob M :-) 39335 From: Ken O Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 0:01am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi Howard > ================== > Then do not purposely do *anything*. Do not purposely eat or > take medicine or say hello & goodbye or read suttas or study Abhidhamma, for when you do so, so you say, "the I is involved". k: Yup one never know even if one purposedly read the text just to gain more dhamma knowledge can be conditioned by lobha as our cetana is conditioned by underlying tendecies. In the strictest sense, saying hello and pleasantaries also can be conditioned by a lobha due to conforming to social norms, there is this possibility. That is why the only way out is still wise attention. > Ken if one consistently insists on presuming self whenever > cetana is involved, one inevitable result will be rapid death. k: Nope unless one understand that underlying tendecies can be eradicated by wise attention, there is hope. We live our life with patience, courage and faith even though the eradication of underlying tendecies can be a very gigantic challenge. It may take us countless aeons to eradicate them but one small step in the right step is a giant leap. Ken O 39336 From: Andrew Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 0:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Bhante Vimalaramsi wrote: > Dhamma Greetings Andrew, > > I can show you some examples of how a smile with loving and kind thoughts > changes others minds. Over the years I have been invited to visit many > people who have terrible disease and are on their death beds. [snip] Dear Bhante I do appreciate your sharing of some of your experiences helping the sick and dying. I have the greatest respect and admiration for your compassionate work and wish you well with it in the future. On the specific subject at hand, and as a matter of fact, I do not doubt that a sincere smile can help to condition the mind of another in a wholesome direction. Nothing I have written to date was intended to set volition against the arising of a sincere smile. I was trying to make the point that, as the Buddha said in the Bhaddekaraatta Sutta, we should "with insight ... see each presently arisen state" and know it and be sure of it "invincibly, unshakeably". I suggest therefore that it would be good to know, as far as possible, exactly what is happening when our sincere smile to all intents and purposes affects the mind of another in a seemingly wholesome way. My experience is that: 1. it is impossible to know exactly what is going on in another's mind with 100% certainty; 2. sometimes people appear to me to be paying attention to me but actually aren't; 3. sometimes my sincere smile is followed by aggression towards me by the person I was smiling at (eg by a "mentally retarded" person). I therefore conclude that, whilst it seems in many cases that my sincere smile has caused a wholesome response from another, this is because of conditions and not "me". Me smiling sincerely is not a controlling factor such that I can ever smile at someone and think "Let your consciousness be thus" and be guaranteed that it will be so. And because I cannot do this in ALL cases, "my" volition cannot be thought of as a universally causative factor. I am thus unwise to let myself think that the apparent efficacy of my sincere smiling in the majority of cases means that "I can change other's minds" and should go around deliberately trying to do so. I suspect that the process is very complex and that I need to understand my conceiving of things with the insight of the Dhamma. Do you think I am looking at this subject in an insightful manner? Your comments would be gratefully received. With respect Andrew 39337 From: Andrew Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 0:13am Subject: Re: I'm back --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "gazita2002" wrote: > > Hello friends, > > Letting you know I'm back home and, altho a tad sore, I'm fine. > Thanking you all for your kind thoughts and words; I haven't caught > up with all the posts since being out of action and I can see there > are HEAPS!!!! Dear Azita All the Cooranites were thinking of you this weekend and are glad to know you are on the mend. A little while ago, you asked a question and I promised you we would discuss it and answer it. None of us could remember exactly what your question was but we decided to answer it anyway. But you'll have to wait a little while longer as the answer, whilst present, is still maturing a wee bit. As my granny used to say, you should never scrape the skin off a rice pudding ... I'll report back soon. Best wishes Andrew 39338 From: robmoult Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 0:19am Subject: Re: Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Andrew, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: > > Hi Rob M > > I seem to recall you did something similar to this before to which > myself and others responded? Anyway, you have asked for comments so > here goes. > ===== I tried a slightly different exercise before. I compared the list of wholesome mental states that opens the Dhammasangani with the corresponding list from the Abhidhammattha Sangaha. I noted the following differences: Dhammasangani - Open ended list - Huge overlap in terms (multiple repititions of the same term using slightly different terms) Abhidhammattha Sangaha - Closed ended list - No overlap in terms From this, I postulated that the list in the Abhidhammattha Sangaha was well suited to defining a list of ultimate realities but the presentation of the Dhammasangani indicated that the author had no intention of creating a list of ultimate realities. In any case, this is what I tried to do. Unfortunately, I did not communicate clearly enough and the replies generally tried to defend the Abhidhammattha Sangaha (it was never my intention to attack the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, I have huge respect for this volume). Perhaps, I was too hasty to drop that thread when I sensed that I had not communicated my point clearly enough. Andrew, I apologize if there were any unanswered messages from you. ===== > I have just done a quick literature search of Swedish novels and, > because I did not find the word "lonely" very often, I am going to > conclude that "loneliness" is not a central theme of Swedish > literature. > > Would I be right? Certainly not. I believe it is an error to > conclude that quantitative language searches always translate to > qualitative ranking. Big mistake IMHO. ===== I am willing to concede this point. Quantitive language searches do not ALWAYS translate to qualitative ranking. I would really appreciate your straightening out of my views if you could point me to some Sutta or Abhidhamma refrences. ===== > > Because of the anatta and anicca teachings, the Buddha *had* to say > something like this: "Though the wise one has transcended the > conceived, he might still say 'I speak'. He might say too 'they > speak to me'. Skilful, knowing the world's parlance, he uses such > terms as mere expressions" [SN II 17]. > ===== Given the contents of Mn1 (see my recent message to Bhante Vimalarmmsi), I interpret this as the Budhha saying that He directly knows (He is not subject to conceiving), but even so, He uses terms that lend themselves to conceiving by uninstructed worldlings without misapprehending them. My point here is that I think that the Buddha is talking about "directly knowing" vs. "conceptual proliferation"; I don't think that the Buddha is talking about taking "concept" as an object of thinking vs. taking "reality" as an object of thinking. Again, my understanding is more clearly expressed in my message to Bhante Vimalarmmsi. ===== > I for one completely understand why the Buddha didn't go on and on > about the presently-arisen realities behind the "mere expressions" he > was using. Have you ever had an extended Dhamma discussion with > someone who constantly tells you to think of things in terms of > paramattha dhammas rather than the "ocean of concepts" we all float > around in? The results of your search: > A. don't surprise me in the least, and > B. don't make me feel that directly knowing the substance behind > our "mere expressions" is not a central part of the Dhamma. > > The important things are often hidden away from view, don't you > think? Well, perhaps you don't ...? My two cents worth. (-: ===== Did the Buddha not talk about an "open fist" (i.e. not concealing any part of the Dhamma)? When the audience was correct, I don't think that the Buddha had any problem raising very deep points of Dhamma (the Mulapariyaya Sutta is one example - try reading that Sutta without a commentary on hand!). At this point, it is still a thought (citta-vipallasa?), it is not yet a view (ditthi-vipallasa). I welcome further discussion. Andrew, you may be interested in reading my recent post to James as well. Metta, Rob M :-) 39339 From: Andrew Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 0:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] Value of discussion (was evil thoughts) Hi Hugo Thanks for your post. I have noted all the points you made. Thanks also for all the smiles! There is one matter that often confuses me and maybe you can help? It relates to the below: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Hugo wrote: [snip] > A direct yes or no answer to the following question will clarify my > doubts, is the Buddha encouraging us to say things like "I think" when > we do not have direct knowledge or not? I have read many suttas where the Buddha talks about "direct knowing" and I assume this is something different from "indirect knowing" (intellectual knowing?). Do you think it is possible to directly know something and later call it to mind such that you can say "back then, I had a moment when I directly knew such-and-such"? This isn't a trick debating question. Don't answer it if you don't feel like it. Anyone else who would like to chime in, please do so. FYI I have a feeling that we worldlings can't recall any moments of direct knowing. But I could be wrong ... Best wishes Andrew 39340 From: Ken O Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 0:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Giving a Smile Hi Rob M Oops I forget to add another one, alobha <> I am saying adosa and alobha are generosity, that is in the 8NP. Why? because he forget that adosa and alobha are both root conditions for all sobhana cittas. Right understanding cannot arise without alobha and adosa, so does the three Abstinences (virati-cetasikas), so does sati, so does the other two immeasureables. Metta is also adosa. The Atthasalini (I, Book I, Part IV, Chapter 1, 127) defines non-aversion, adosa, as follows: << ... Absence of hate has the characteristic of freedom from churlishness or resentment, like an agreeable friend; the function of destroying vexation, or dispelling distress, like sandalwood: the manifestation of being pleasing, like the full moon...>> Equanmity The Visuddhimagga (XIV, 153) states about equanimity : << It has the characteristic of conveying citta and cetasikas evenly. Its function is to prevent deficiency and excess, or its function is to inhibit partiality. It is manifested as neutrality. It should be regarded as like a conductor (driver) who looks on with equanimity on thoroughbreds progressing evenly.>> Visuddhimagga IX, 95) states about mudita which is here translated as gladness: <> Can equanmity and mudita arise without adosa and alobha as root condition- think about it. We do not need to be very learned or quote thousand of suttas or can recite the whole tripitika or very good at pali to know what is dhamma. I dont confront pessimism with optimism because that is not what Buddha taught. One thing a lot of people does not understand this little trick, the more you understand suffering, the happier you are :). The more you understand impermanence, you less attached you are to things, the more you are "feeling free". The more you understand Anatta, the less you are concern about "oneself", or ego, honour etc. Why there is a need to do explain it detail whether genersity is taught because we are scare what society think about us, blah! One understand Buddhism one knows that generosity is part of 8NP, is part of salvation, is auto inclusion, isn't that nice. Ken O 39341 From: Ken O Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 1:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Giving a Smile It should be James and then (Rob M) Rob - thanks - apparently I have mistaken you as James because I read the mail very fast. That is my usual mistake, no patient (dosa mula cittas), look at things too fast and then have a conclusion. Hmm no wise attention at that time . Again Rob thank for telling people about me :-) Deeply appreciated. Ken O 39342 From: robmoult Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 1:20am Subject: Re: Evil thoughts (Howard) Hi Ken H, Finally, I reply to this. It is a lazy Sunday afternoon. My wife is on a ten-day meditation retreat (she went for ten days, came home for a week, and now is gone again for another ten days). --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi Rob M, > > Thanks for your reply. After a cordial exchange of harrumphs, you > wrote: > ---------------- > > I thought that with my puppy-training analogy that we had finally > achieved a breakthrough with a position that we could both support. > > ----------------- > > Rob, you don't read all your messages! Every time you have put > forward your 'habit condition' theory I have pooh-poohed it. (A good > word while we're on a puppy-training theme.) ===== I just noticed a post of Nina's (39191) in which she replied to Larry's request for an example of a habit: Since we are back from India Lodewijk has formed a new habit: reading a sutta at night, and I: reading a sutta with the breakfast coffee. (Phil will like this.) We can form new habits, break old ones, form good and bad habits. Habit: what we usually do, or think. What is often done becomes a habit. What is it? Citta and cetasika, kusala or akusala. It is the action of accumulating, during the period of javana cittas. Accumulation is a difficult word. As I said it also denotes what lies dormant, and these can be: good and bad dispositions. I think that Nina and I are saying the same thing... that repeated actions will tend to repeat again. This is their nature. One moment, I may be thinking of a self who is meditating. The next moment, I am thinking of a person with true metta. As you know, one cannot have attachment to self-view and thoughts of true metta at the same time. Will those thoughts of self-view tend to create further accumulations, a deeper habit? Yup, they will. Will those thoughts of true metta also tend to create further accumulations, a deeper habit? Yup again! This is where right effort of the Eightfold Noble Path comes in. Right effort is making an effort to: - Reduce akusala - Eliminate akusala - Make kusala grow - Maintain kusala Is this not just a more technical way of saying what Nina said, "We can form new habits, break old ones, form good and bad habits." ===== >I have said, "But if > you, as a typical worldling, are sitting in meditation having > thoughts of self and lobha for Path-progress (and dosa for 'having > to do this while your mates are out having a good time' etc.), then > what kind of habit are you developing?" > > The answer is, of course, 'an akusala habit' (which is not a good > conditioning factor for enlightenment)! ===== At those moments when my mind is rooted in akusala, you are dead right, then I am reinforcing those bad habits. However, for those moments when I am being mindful or when I am radiating true metta, then I am reinforcing good habits. The key point here is that weight of the kamma depends on the strength of the volition at the moment. 99.999% of the time, I have akusala thoughts (clinging to sense data, clinging to existence, attachment to self view, etc.) but the kamma created is very weak because the volition is very weak. In that moment of pure metta, the volition is incredibly strong because I am "going against the natural flow". This incredibly strong volition associated with the kusala action creates incredibly powerful good kamma. ===== > > ------------------------- > RM: > Specifically: > - the mind cannot be controlled > ------------------------- > > I'll give that a tick. Some people might protest and quote where the > Buddha extols 'a controlled mind,' but you and I know what we > mean. :-) > > ----------------------- > RM: > - belief that the mind can be controlled could lead to "self > view" > ----------------------- > > Another tick; but is there any "could" about it? In one sutta > (often quoted on DSG) the Buddha said, "If consciousness [body, > feelings, perceptions and volitions] were self, it would be possible > to decree, 'let my consciousness be thus!' [etc.]." > > So it would seem that the idea of self and the idea of control > always go hand in hand. > > -------------- > RM: > - accumulations are an important factor in determining the > current mental state > > -------------- > > Yes (I think I know what you mean). > > --------------------------- > RM: > - accumulations operate through natural decisive support > condition (pakatupanissaya) > - the conditioning factors for pakatupanissaya are: > 1. Strong past rupa > 2. Strong past mental states > 3. Strong past cetasikas > 4. Some strong past concepts > - One of the ways in which a rupa / mental state / cetasika / > concept can be made "strong" is through repeated action (aka > training) > > -------------------------- > > I defer to your superior knowledge. :-) > > ---------------- > RM: > In other words, if I sit for an hour a day radiating metta > with energy (viriya), faith (saddha), concentration (samadhi), > mindfulness (sati) and wisdom (panna), then this will help to create > a "strong past mental state" or a "strong past concept" or a "strong > past cetasika (adosa)" which can exert strong influence over future > mental states. > > ----------------- > > Boy, will it ever! I think if you can do that for one *second* per > day you will be on the verge of enlightenment. How is it done? How > does one decree, "Let my mental states be thus?" > > :-) In other words, we are back where we started: You can't escape > samsara and you can't develop wholesome qualities by wanting > to. The only factors for enlightenment are; association > with wise friends (study), hearing the true Dhamma (study), wise > consideration of the true Dhamma (study) and practice (satipatthana) > in accordance with what you have studied. ===== Ken H, we are closer than you might think :-) Let me pose you a question. I think that we both know that jhanas do not lead to enlightenment. Prior to the Buddha, others (such as Udaka, Gotama's final teacher) reached the highest levels of jhana yet were unable to get enlightened. Since this is true, why did the Buddha not dismiss the jhanas? Why did the Buddha put so much emphasis on the jhanas (i.e. right concentration in the Noble Eightfold Path)? Could it be because jhanas (i.e. "formal meditation") are important preparatory work that helps the mind get ready for enlightenment? Metta, Rob M :-) PS: You might also want to read my recent posts on "Concept and Reality in Primary Texts"; some interesting discussions. 39343 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 1:31am Subject: Re: Lodewijk's speech - anusayas Hello Phil, op 05-12-2004 00:55 schreef plnao op plnao@j...: I keep associating him with Dag Hammerskjold in my > mind, > to tell you the truth, because of his diplomatic background! Dag > Hammerskjold is a hero of mine! N: Lodewijk was pleased with your words and said that on account of them I had a lot of conceit. He admires Dag H. very much. When we first came to New York the accident (sabotage?) had just happened and he was deeply impressed by the commemoration in the u.n. Assembly. He has the book Markings. Dag H was close to Buddhism. He stressed being active in the world and this is what Lodewijk likes to stress. He is not inclined to speak in public but cannot refuse when Kh Sujin requests something. He said that when he saw all the 120 monks sitting there he was so moved. Ph: I read in one of your books that the quality of our birth depends on kamma, > but > our character depends on accumulations. N: In a sutta there was en example: someone was born rich (result of kamma) but he had accumulated stinginess and lived like a miser (habits or character). Ph: I still have trouble understanding how accumulations lie latent in citta, N: When you are fast asleep, no objects appear thorugh the six doors. As soon as you wake up there may be attachment to seeing, visible object etc. Where does this come from? There must be akusala tendencies lying dormant in each citta, even when you are fast asleep. I like what you say about character built up over time. And about truthfulness. Ph: We don't want to be warriors, but we do need courage to begin to see > realities in > a way that ever so gradually begins to allow us to see into anatta and the > four > noble truths. It is so easy to grasp at comfortable, eternal solutions. But > with > courage, we don't do that. N: I like very much what you write here. Nina. 39344 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 1:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Dear friend James, It is good you ask, people get misunderstandings when reading quotes. We have to see them in context. Do ask again every time you see a quote, it is useful. op 03-12-2004 22:33 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@y...: . J. quotes: K. Sujin responded by saying that instead of seeing the deeply > rooted >>> lobha, the self doesn't like it again. When there's more > understanding, >>> one takes it easy. It doesn't matter what is arising, because > it has >>> arisen by conditions, completely arisen by conditions. We have > the latent >>> tendency for lobha, dosa and other akusala (unwholesome > states). But if >>> the akusala moment does not arise, how can one know that one > still has it? >>> So, it's good to know the truth of one's accumulations and this > is the >>> way to develop panna, because it can understand reality. J: Is this how the Buddha said one > should view the defilements? This seems to be a type of "if it > feels good, do it" philosophy. I'm not saying that hating one's > defilements is productive (I don't think it is), but I also don't > think that one should accept them. What do you think? N: It is not a question of accepting them, but: understanding them as impersonal, conditioned elements. This is the Middle Way. Dhamma is like a mirror. As you also know from your contacts with others when you were helping meditation groups in the U.S. at the Thai temple, people worry about their akusala, want to ignore it. Try to suppress it with an idea of self and this is not the solution. Some people wonder: why is Kh. Sujin stressing lobha so much instead of emphasizing the development of kusala and abstaining from akusala? The second noble Truth is lobha, all shades of attachment and clinging, including clinging to the wrong view of self. We have to know the second noble Truth at this moment. It is hard to see, and that is why she is explaining this all the time. Also akusala is real, but we take it for my akusala. Know it as non-self. Be truthful to oneself. There are her books on metta and the ten bases of kusala Phil posted. When in Thailand I can notice the emphasis on kusala in the deeds of all my friends there, as Bhante V. also explained. At the same time Kh.S. helps us all not to take kusala nor akusala for self and to learn to detect our clinging to self. The sotapanna (first stage of enlightenment) has eradicated the wrong view of self and his/her kusala is so much purer. Moreover, there are no longer conditions for transgressing the five precepts, no more conditions to harm others in a serious way. I was so impressed by a text for our Pali lesson yesterday: James, do you see: Right view is wholesomeness. Khun Sujin wants to go to the roots. Detachment is stressed, and first: detachment from wrong view. Right view conditions kusala. This sutta is an exhortation not to be satisfied of keeping the precepts without pañña. That is only temporary, when the occasion arises one transgresses them. It is an exhortation to develop pañña. You will see that Kh stresses what is also in the suttas: seeing and the defilements arising on account of visible object. We keep on seeing persons or things in the visible object. Or we cling to my seeing. We fail to consider them as impersonal elements and this gives rise to a great deal of akusala. Nina. 39345 From: plnao Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 2:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] I'm back Welcome back, Azita. > Dhamma does help in these rather scary situations. To let go > [kind of..] and know that there is nothing that can stop any > vipakacitta from arising, just like now, is somehow releasing. > Except, of course, when one is still throwing up 30 hours after > anaesthetic ;-( Don't forget to remember that throwing up is a conditioned nama! Or is it a rupa? Oh no, back to the drawing board. I hope your sick feeling passes soon. Metta, Phil 39346 From: plnao Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 2:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Rob, and all Sorry, just popping in quickly to clarify some beginners' points. Sorry that I don't have time tonight to read the whole thread. 1) Isn't "realities" simply the way "paramattha dhammas" is translated? Obviously it is central to Abhidhamma. 2) Aren't the khandas realities, no matter what they're called? 2) I think I learned that the term "cetasika" also doesn't appear in the Suttanta. Is that right? We know how central that is to Abhidhamma. If something doesn't appear in the Suttanta, does that mean you no longer think it is the Buddha's teaching? 3) Again, I haven't followed the concept vs. reality dispute, but when I look at it it seems obvious. Isn't thinking about anger a concept and the anger itself a reality? Can't we experience anger no matter what we call it? What am I missing here to understand why there is any controversy? Basic questions, I know. Thanks in advance. Metta, Phil p.s I think it is quite groovy the way your wife came home from a meditation retreat, and then took off on another one. More kusala to rejoice in. 39347 From: robmoult Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 3:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "plnao" wrote: > 1) Isn't "realities" simply the way "paramattha dhammas" is > translated? Obviously it is central to Abhidhamma. ===== Realities / paramattha dhammas are key to the structure of the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, but I am not aware of realities / paramattha dhammas being mentioned as ontological concepts being mentioned in the Suttas or the Abhidhamma texts. See my message #39334 to James for more details. ===== > > 2) Aren't the khandas realities, no matter what they're called? > ===== Khandas are very important in the Buddha's teachings and they appear frequently in the Suttas and in the Abhidhamma. However, I am not aware of any mention of their existence or non-existence (i.e. ontological focus) except in the Abhidhammattha Sangaha. ===== > 2) I think I learned that the term "cetasika" also doesn't appear in the > Suttanta. Is > that right? We know how central that is to Abhidhamma. If something doesn't > appear in > the Suttanta, does that mean you no longer think it is the Buddha's > teaching? ===== According to Nyanatiloka's dictionary, the term "cetasika" occurs often in the old sutta texts, but only as adjective (e.g. cetasikam sukham, etc.) or, at times, used as a singular neuter noun (e.g. D. 1; p. 213, PTS). As a designation for mental factors, or concomitants of consciousness (citta-sampayutta dhamma), it is frequently met with in Dhammasangani as cetasika-dhamma, while in Visuddhimagga, Abhidhammattha Sangaha, etc., cetasika is used also as a neuter noun, in the sense of mental phenomenon. Cetasikas (or mental factors) are clearly a part of the Buddha's teaching. However, as with khandas, I am not aware of any mention of their existence or non-existence (i.e. ontological focus) except in the Abhidhammattha Sangaha. ===== > > 3) Again, I haven't followed the concept vs. reality dispute, > but when I look at it it seems obvious. Isn't thinking about anger a > concept and the anger itself a reality? ===== Again, why the ontological focus? Why do we need to bundle objects of mental states into "that which exists" and "that which does not exist"? See my recent message to Bhante Vimalaramsi in which I pointed out that the Mulapariyaya Sutta focuses on the thinking processes ("directly knowing" vs. "perceiving / conceiving") but not on the nature of the object (i.e. no difference between earth [a paramattha dhamma] and a being [a concept]). ===== > Can't we experience anger no matter what we call it? What am I missing here > to understand > why there is any controversy? > ===== We experience anger no matter what we call it. Anger (a defilement) arises not because the object is a reality or a concept, but rather because of mental proliferation. The controversy arises because I am saying that the structure around which Acariya Anuruddha chose to structure his summary of the Abhidhamma (i.e. the Abhidhammattha Sangaha) is not key to the Buddha's teachings. ===== > Basic questions, I know. Thanks in advance. > ===== Not basic at all... very important questions! ===== > Metta, > Phil > p.s I think it is quite groovy the way your wife came home from a meditation > retreat, > and then took off on another one. More kusala to rejoice in. ===== I agree... more kusala to rejoice in. Metta, Rob M :-) 39348 From: robmoult Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 3:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi All, The Pali word pannatti (concept) does not appear in Nyanatiloka's Dictionary / Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines. Two possible explanations: 1. Ven. Nyanatiloka messed up big time 2. Ven. Nyanatiloka did not consider the term important enough to be included Metta, Rob M :-) 39349 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 4:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hello RobM, all, The word 'conception' appears = 1. thought-c 2.vitakka-vicaara Are the following definitions by Nyanatiloka of any help? vitakka: 'thought', 'thought-conception', is one of the 'secondary' (not constant) mental concomitants (s. Tab. II), and may be either karmically wholesome, unwholesome or neutral. - "There are 3 karmically unwholesome (akusala) thoughts: sensuous thought (káma- vitakka), hating thought (byápáda-v.), and cruel thought (vihimsa- v.). There are 3 karmically wholesome (kusala) thoughts: thought of renunciation (nekkhamma-v.), of hatelessness (avyápáda-v.), of not harming (avihimsá-v.) " The latter three constitute 'right thought', the 2nd link of the 8-fold Path (s. magga 2). On the 'Removal of Distracting Thoughts' (vitakka-santhána), s. M. 20 (tr. in WHEEL 21). vitakka-vicára: 'thought-conception and discursive thinking', (or 'applied and sustained thought') are verbal functions (vací- sankhára: s. sankhára) of the mind, the so-called 'inner speech ('parole interieure'). They are constituents of the 1st absorption (s. jhána), but absent in the higher absorptions. (1) "Thought-conception (vitakka) is the laying hold of a thought, giving it attention. Its characteristic consists in fixing the consciousness to the object. (2) "Discursive thinking (vicára) is the roaming about and moving to and fro of the mind.... It manifests itself as continued activity of mind" (Vis.M. IV). (1) is compared with the striking against a bell, (2) with its resounding; (1) with the seizing of a pot, (2) with wiping it. (Cf. Vis . IV.). metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > > Hi All, > > The Pali word pannatti (concept) does not appear in Nyanatiloka's > Dictionary / Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines. > > Two possible explanations: > 1. Ven. Nyanatiloka messed up big time > 2. Ven. Nyanatiloka did not consider the term important enough to be > included > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 39350 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 4:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > >> > Khandas are very important in the Buddha's teachings and they appear > frequently in the Suttas and in the Abhidhamma. However, I am not > aware of any mention of their existence or non-existence (i.e. > ontological focus) except in the Abhidhammattha Sangaha. > Dear RobM, Samyutta nikaya Khanda vagga XXII 94 (p.950 of Bodhi translation) "Rupa(matter, physical phenomena) that is impermanent, suffering and subject to change: this the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say it exists. Feeling...perception..volitional formations..consciouness..that is impermanent, suffering and subject to change..I too say that it exists" endquote RobertK 39351 From: robmoult Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 5:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Christine, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > > Hello RobM, all, > > The word 'conception' appears = 1. thought-c 2.vitakka-vicaara > > Are the following definitions by Nyanatiloka of any help? > > vitakka: 'thought', 'thought-conception', is one of the 'secondary' > (not constant) mental concomitants (s. Tab. II), and may be either > karmically wholesome, unwholesome or neutral. - "There are 3 > karmically unwholesome (akusala) thoughts: sensuous thought (káma- > vitakka), hating thought (byápáda-v.), and cruel thought (vihimsa- > v.). There are 3 karmically wholesome (kusala) thoughts: thought of > renunciation (nekkhamma-v.), of hatelessness (avyápáda-v.), of not > harming (avihimsá-v.) " The latter three constitute 'right thought', > the 2nd link of the 8-fold Path (s. magga 2). > > On the 'Removal of Distracting Thoughts' (vitakka-santhána), s. M. > 20 (tr. in WHEEL 21). > > vitakka-vicára: 'thought-conception and discursive thinking', > (or 'applied and sustained thought') are verbal functions (vací- > sankhára: s. sankhára) of the mind, the so-called 'inner speech > ('parole interieure'). They are constituents of the 1st absorption > (s. jhána), but absent in the higher absorptions. > > (1) "Thought-conception (vitakka) is the laying hold of a thought, > giving it attention. Its characteristic consists in fixing the > consciousness to the object. > > (2) "Discursive thinking (vicára) is the roaming about and moving to > and fro of the mind.... It manifests itself as continued activity of > mind" (Vis.M. IV). > > (1) is compared with the striking against a bell, (2) with its > resounding; (1) with the seizing of a pot, (2) with wiping it. (Cf. > Vis . IV.). > > metta and peace, > Christine > ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" > wrote: > > > > Hi All, > > > > The Pali word pannatti (concept) does not appear in Nyanatiloka's > > Dictionary / Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines. > > > > Two possible explanations: > > 1. Ven. Nyanatiloka messed up big time > > 2. Ven. Nyanatiloka did not consider the term important enough to > be > > included > > > > Metta, > > Rob M :-) ===== Thanks for this... Pannatti is a concept, something that exists as distinct from a reality. It has something of an ontological (reality vs. non- reality) aspect to it. The definition of vitakka (and vicara) include the idea of thought- conception but this is not the same as reality vs. non-reality. Metta, Rob M :-) 39352 From: Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 0:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi, Rob (and Bhante, and James) - Bhante, I'm pleased that you brought up that little but wonderful book of Bhikkhu ~Nanananda. I've read it more than once, and still have far from plumbed its depths. I also own, and even more greatly love, his wonderful little commentary on the Kalakarama Sutta. Rob, I very much like what you write in the following. Here are a few comments giving my perspective: 1) I believe that there are realities that are momentary and realities of a relational nature that span many moments. It is not brevity of duration that distinguishes actual from imagined. 2) I believe that both sorts of reality, momentary and non-momentary, can be directly apprehended, but not by everyone. 3) It is standard to apprehend momentary, five-sense-door objects directly, though they are also grasped conceptually throught the mind-door in order to think about them and communicate with regard to them. 4) As far as realities that are not momentary are concerned, they are known by a non-arahant only indirectly through the thinking process and concept construction. No non-arahant grasps relational realities directly. Thus, in the non-arahant, the distinctions (a) between directly known and conceptually known, (b) between ultimate truth and conventional truth, and (c) between momentary and non-momentary all seem to coincide. Only an arahant, having developed supermundane wisdom, has mental function so transformed as to be able to apprehend non-momentary realities directly as well. 5) In a non-arahant, all cognitive functions, whether dealing with momentary or non-momentary realities, are defiled by ignorance, and their objects are misapprehended due to the "original sins" of reification and subject-object duality. In an arahant, however, all realities, momentary and non-momentary, are directly knowable without distortion, as they are, with pristine wisdom. With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/5/04 1:40:02 AM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > > Venerable Sir, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Bhante Vimalaramsi > wrote: > >Dhamma Greetings James, > > > >Have you ever run across a book called 'Concepts and Reality' by > >Venerable Nananada? It is worth a read, if you have the time and > >inclination. Many bhikkhus place a great deal interest on this > book. > > > >Maha-Metta > >always > >Bhante Vimalaramsi > > ===== > > I read this book some time ago and pulled it out when you referenced > it in your post. I quote from the Preface: > > The analysis of the naure of concepts constitutes an imporant facet > of the Buddhist doctrine of Anatta ('not-self'). Buddhism traces the > idea of a soul to a fundamental error in understanding the facts of > experience. This ignorance (avijja) is reflected to a great extent > in the words and concepts in worldly parlance. Being unaware of > their limitations, man is generally prone to cling to them > dogmatically and this accounts for a good deal of complications in > his intellectual and emotional life. Hence an understanding of the > nature of concepts as such is a preliminary step in the spiritual > endeavour in Buddhism. The Buddha's teachings on this particular > aspect of our phenomenal existence can best be appreciated with the > aid of the two key-words, 'papanca' and 'papanca-sanna-sankha', an > evaluation of which is the aim of this work. > > > > I wholehartedly agree with Bhikkhu Nanananda that conceptual > proliferation (my translation of 'papanca' and 'papanca-sanna- > sankha') is a critical element of Buddhism. However, I contend that > the separating of "concept" and "reality" in an ontological fashion > is not a key element of the Buddha's teachings. In other > words, "conceptual proliferation" vs. "directly knowing" is very > important whereas "conceptual object" vs. "real object" is not a key > element. > > My thinking has, in part, been influenced by the Mulapariya Sutta > (Mn 1) wherein the Buddha expains the difference in pattern of > thinking between the uninstructed worldling (that's us), the learner > (Sotapanna, Sakadagami and Anagami), the Arahant and the Buddha. To > summarize this complex sutta in a few words: > - We perceive then conceive, taking delight because we have not > fully understood the object > - Learners directly know and may or may not conceive, they should > not take delight so that they may fully understand the object > - Arahants directly know and do not conceive because they have > uprooted the three evil roots > - Buddha directly knows and does not conceive because He has fully > understood the object to the end and because He has understood > dependent origination > > It is noteworthy that in this sutta, the Buddha lists 24 objects > that can be perceived/conceived/directly known. The 24 objects are: > - Earth / water / fire / air > - Beings / Gods > - Pajapati / Brahma / Gods of Streaming Radiance / Gods of Refulgent > Glory / Gods of Abundant Fruit / Vanquishers > - Base of infinite space / base of infinite consciousness / base of > nothingness / base of neither perception nor non-perception > - The seen / the heard / the sensed / the cognized > - Unity / diversity / all / Nibbana > > The Sutta treats all of these object in exactly the same way, even > though some of the objects would fall into the Abhidhammattaha > Sangaha category of "concept" while others would fall into the > Abhidhammattaha Sangaha category of "reality". > > Though the title of Bhikkhu Nanananda's book is "Concept and Reality > in Early Buddhist Thought", this book (as indicated in the preface) > is a study on conceptual proliferation. In addition to the title, > the term "reality" is briefy mentioned only four times in this 150 > page book (one of the references is in the chapter titled "Prapanca > in Mahayana Buddhism"). The Pali term "paramattha" is not in the > index of this book. > > With great respect, > Rob M :-) > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39353 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 5:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: AN III - 100 mental misconduct vs. thoughts of ill-will Hi, Phil (and KenH) Butting in here if I may ;-)) --- plnao wrote: ... Needless to say, like all beginners, I see the exhortative, prescriptive sounding language used in the suttas (in translation, at the very least, and presumedly in the original as well) and take it as written. You're right though, it is so much better to see them as descriptive. So, when we read, for example, that one removes an unwholesome thought and replaces it with a wholesome one the way a carpenter replaces a rotten peg with a solid one, it is a description of what happens when panna rules rather than a prescription of what someone should do. Jon: A topic well worth discussing, but I find it helps to have the particular wording to hand. Since I couldn't readily find the peg passage you refer to, I have given below the statement of the 4 padhanas from Nyanatiloka's 'Buddhist Dictionary' under the entry 'padhana', a passage that comes up frequently in this context. As we know, the Buddha's whole teaching can be characterised by the general pattern 'when this occurs, that comes to be; when this is absent, that does not come to be', and I think these passages can be seen in the same (i.e., non-prescriptive) vein. It is also worth noting (since we share a background in ESL ;-)), that this and most of the other references one seems to come across are in the third person ('a monk does this and that'), rather than in second person which we would more normally associate with prescriptive language. Did the Buddha tell people to have more kusala, or did he rather help them to see the value of having more kusala, and point out the different kinds of kusala to be developed and their relative merits? To me, the former would suggest that kusala could be made to arise by following a certain set of procedures with the right kind of intention, which is definitely not the flavour of the dhamma overall, as I see it. Phil: For example, we talk of guarding sense doors, and it's easy to think of this as a prescribed practice, but whenever there is kusala citta, the sense doors *are* guarded, because there can only be congnition through one sense door at a time. Jon: Absolutely so. See the reference to guarded sense doors in the first of the 4 right efforts: (1) "What now, o monks, is the effort to avoid? Perceiving a form, or a sound, or an odour, or a taste, or a bodily or mental impression, the monk neither adheres to the whole nor to its parts. And he strives to ward off that through which evil and unwholesome things might arise, such as greed and sorrow, if he remained with unguarded senses; and he watches over his senses, restrains his senses. This is called the effort to avoid. It's interesting to note that the primary meaning of the effort to avoid (i.e., the first of the 2 parts to it) is given in these terms: "Perceiving a form, or a sound, or an odour, or a taste, or a bodily or mental impression, the monk neither adheres to the whole nor to its parts." There is nothing prescriptive about this, surely. Of course, if we read it as referring to something to be done (in the sense of a technique or practice of some kind), then we might assume that we are being told/urged to do it. But I think the stage of 'not adhering to the whole nor [the] parts' of arising sense door objects refers to the presence of a relatively high level of awareness and understanding and is not something that can somehow be 'practised'. So this level of sati and panna would I believe be what is meant by remaining with unguarded senses in the second part of the definition. Phil, much more that could be discussed in your post, particularly the 'active' language issue (which I see as being different to the 'prescriptive' language issue), but this is already long enough. Hoping that this helps you feel more comfortable with a non-prescriptive interpretation of this particular passage. Jon From Nyanatiloka's 'Buddhist Dictionary', 'padhaana': "The monk rouses his will to avoid the arising of evil, unwholesome things not yet arisen ... to overcome them ... to develop wholesome things not yet arisen ... to maintain them, and not to let them disappear, but to bring them to growth, to maturity and to the full perfection of development. And he makes effort, stirs up his energy, exerts his mind and strives" (A. IV, 13). (1) "What now, o monks, is the effort to avoid? Perceiving a form, or a sound, or an odour, or a taste, or a bodily or mental impression, the monk neither adheres to the whole nor to its parts. And he strives to ward off that through which evil and unwholesome things might arise, such as greed and sorrow, if he remained with unguarded senses; and he watches over his senses, restrains his senses. This is called the effort to avoid. (2) "What now is the effort to overcome? The monk does not retain any thought of sensual lust, or any other evil, unwholesome states that may have arisen; he abandons them, dispels them, destroys them, causes them to disappear. This is called the effort to overcome. (3) "What now is the effort to develop? The monk develops the factors of enlightenment, bent on solitude, on detachment, on extinction, and ending in deliverance, namely: mindfulness (sati), investigation of the law (dhamma-vicaya), energy (viriya), rapture (píti), tranquillity (passaddhi), concentraton (samádhi), equanimity (upekkhá). This is called the effort to develop. (4) "What now is the effort to maintain? The monk keeps firmly in his mind a favourable object of concentration, such as the mental image of a skeleton, a corpse infested by worms, a corpse blueblack in colour, a festering corpse, a corpse riddled with holes, a corpse swollen up. This is called the effort to maintain" (A. IV, 14). 39354 From: Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 0:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi, andrew (and Rob) - In a message dated 12/5/04 2:31:55 AM Eastern Standard Time, athel60@t... writes: > Hi Rob M > > I seem to recall you did something similar to this before to which > myself and others responded? Anyway, you have asked for comments so > here goes. > > I have just done a quick literature search of Swedish novels and, > because I did not find the word "lonely" very often, I am going to > conclude that "loneliness" is not a central theme of Swedish > literature. > > Would I be right? Certainly not. I believe it is an error to > conclude that quantitative language searches always translate to > qualitative ranking. Big mistake IMHO. > > Because of the anatta and anicca teachings, the Buddha *had* to say > something like this: "Though the wise one has transcended the > conceived, he might still say 'I speak'. He might say too 'they > speak to me'. Skilful, knowing the world's parlance, he uses such > terms as mere expressions" [SN II 17]. > > I for one completely understand why the Buddha didn't go on and on > about the presently-arisen realities behind the "mere expressions" he > was using. Have you ever had an extended Dhamma discussion with > someone who constantly tells you to think of things in terms of > paramattha dhammas rather than the "ocean of concepts" we all float > around in? The results of your search: > A. don't surprise me in the least, and > B. don't make me feel that directly knowing the substance behind > our "mere expressions" is not a central part of the Dhamma. > > The important things are often hidden away from view, don't you > think? Well, perhaps you don't ...? My two cents worth. (-: > > Best wishes > Andrew > ======================== Although the Buddha did indeed speak of transcending conceiving and also spoke of using concepts but not being fooled, I think that care must be taken in understanding this. I believe that a careful study of how the Buddha talked about conceiving seems to indicate that he was talking about the proliferation of ideas of "me" and "mine" and of substantial self-existence; i.e., of reification, and that he was not criticizing conceptuality in its broadest sense. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39355 From: robmoult Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 5:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Rob K, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" > wrote: > > > >> > > Khandas are very important in the Buddha's teachings and they > appear > > frequently in the Suttas and in the Abhidhamma. However, I am not > > aware of any mention of their existence or non-existence (i.e. > > ontological focus) except in the Abhidhammattha Sangaha. > > > Dear RobM, > Samyutta nikaya Khanda vagga XXII 94 (p.950 of Bodhi translation) > "Rupa(matter, physical phenomena) that is impermanent, suffering and > subject to change: this > the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say it > exists. Feeling...perception..volitional > formations..consciouness..that is impermanent, suffering and > subject to change..I too say that it exists" endquote > RobertK This is excellent. Thank you so much for this Sutta reference. Here is Bhikkhu Bodhi's commentary (p1085, n185): This portion of the Sutta offers an important counterpoint to the message of the Kaccanagotta Sutta (12:15). Here the Buddha emphasizes that he does not reject all ontological propositions, but only those that transend the bounds of possible experience. While the Kaccanagotta Sutta shows that the "Middle Teaching" excludes static, substantialist conceptions of existence and non-existence, the present text shows that the same "Middle Teaching" can accomodate definite pronouncements about these ontological issues. The affirmation of the existence of the five aggregates, as impermanent processes, serves as a rejoinder to illusinist theories, which hold that the world lacks real being. This commentary refers to the Kaccanagotta Sutta. Allow me to quote the beginning of this sutta from Access To Insight: Dwelling at Savatthi... Then Ven. Kaccayana Gotta approached the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: "Lord, 'Right view, right view,' it is said. To what extent is there right view?" "By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as its object) a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. "By & large, Kaccayana, this world is in bondage to attachments, clingings (sustenances), & biases. But one such as this does not get involved with or cling to these attachments, clingings, fixations of awareness, biases, or obsessions; nor is he resolved on 'my self.' He has no uncertainty or doubt that just stress, when arising, is arising; stress, when passing away, is passing away. In this, his knowledge is independent of others. It's to this extent, Kaccayana, that there is right view. "'Everything exists': That is one extreme. 'Everything doesn't exist': That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness. From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form. From name-&-form as a requisite condition come the six sense media. From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress & suffering. Bhikkhu Bodhi's commentary (p734, n29) explains that the Kaccanagotta Sutta is not ontologically focused, but rather states that, in this Sutta, the Buddha is rejecting both eternalism and annihilationism. In other words, if we are looking for ontological statements from the Buddha, we should focus on SN XXII.94. From this Sutta, I conclude that the Buddha was aware of ontological issues of existence vs. non-existence. Bikkhu Bodhi's commentary says that: "[the] "Middle Teaching" can accomodate definite pronouncements about these ontological issues. The affirmation of the existence of the five aggregates, as impermanent processes, serves as a rejoinder to illusionist theories, which hold that the world lacks real being. I again state that ontology is not at the core of the Buddha's teachings. Though it is clear from this Sutta reference that the Buddha was aware of ontological issues, He only made one ontological statement (existence of the five aggregates as impermanent processes) to refute a specific wrong view (illusionist theories). Metta, Rob M :-) 39356 From: buddhatrue Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 6:20am Subject: [dsg] Re: Giving a Smile --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: < Why there is a need to > do explain it detail whether genersity is taught because we are scare > what society think about us, blah! One understand Buddhism one knows > that generosity is part of 8NP, is part of salvation, is auto > inclusion, isn't that nice. > > > > Ken O Friend Ken O, B. Bodhi was correct in saying that generosity (dana) isn't part of the Noble Eightfold Path, but it is important. Most importantly, it allows one to continue to be reborn in the higher planes until the good fortune of being reborn in a Buddha Sasana. However, generosity doesn't lead directly to nibbana, therefore it isn't part of the Noble Eightfold Path. B. Bodhi isn't "forgetting" anything. Metta, James 39357 From: Bhante Vimalaramsi Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 5:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Dhamma Greetings Rob M., One thing you need to understand is that before bhikkhu Nananada became of monk, he was a Bhikkhu Unversity teacher and scholar. He taught bhikkhus and was quite a scholar in his own right. He knew what he was writing about and did this for a definite reason. Sorry he doesn't answer your specific questions, but what book could? Maha-Metta always Bhante Vimalaramsi 39358 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 6:44am Subject: Reminders Hi All, Just a couple of reminders. Trimming When replying to another post, please remember to trim any part of the other post that is not necessary for your reply (whether it appears before or after your own message). If the post you are replying to is a recent one, you may assume that other members will have seen it. Salutation etc Please use a salutation at the beginning of each post, and sign off at the end (preferably with a real name). Thanks for your co-operation. Jon and Sarah PS Comments or questions off-list, please. Thanks. 39359 From: Ken O Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 7:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Rob M Are you saying that the aggregates do not exist? Everthything exist is one extreme - eternalism - because it includes I that is why Buddha say everything exist is not true. Let me quote you another sutta Nidanasamyutta, SN II.17 The Naked Ascetic Kassapa <> everthing does not exist is another extreme << But Kassapa [if one thinks,] 'The one who act is one, the one who experiences [the result] is another,' [then one asserts] with reference to one stricken by feeling: "Suffering is created by another.' When one asserts thus, this amounts to annihilationism.>> because I really experience reality - that is why the experience we have cannot be belong to another. Furthermore before the start of the sutta <<"By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as its object) a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when on sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one >> Existence here is reference to the world. While the sutta I quote above is reference to a self. So Buddha is clear, he knows there is existence but it is conditioned as said in D.O.. Existence pertaining to the world, I are concepts, do not exist, not reality. And non-existence is another extreme because there is reality, there are conditions, there is feeling that is how we have experience the flavour of an object from feeling. Regardless whether paramatha dhammas is a later convention used by Abhidhammist, it serve as a convention to differentiate the five aggregates + Nibbana are real, while the rest are just concepts. Concept is not real. If concept is real, Buddha will have say self exist, the world exist. However, feeling is real that is why it is said in the D.O link., in refutation to a non-existence of reality. Ken O 39360 From: robmoult Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 7:06am Subject: [dsg] Re: Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Rob, I very much like what you write in the following. Here are a few > comments giving my perspective: > 1) I believe that there are realities that are momentary and realities > of a relational nature that span many moments. It is not brevity of duration > that distinguishes actual from imagined. ===== I am not sure where you could find support for this position. As you probably know, the Buddhist Theory of Moments did not really develop until the twelfth century (see "Buddhist Psychology of Perception" by E. R. Sarachchandra p42ff). Those things that are "momentary" are considered in the Abhidhammattha Sangaha to be realities whereas those things which span many moments are either rupa (17 moments) or concepts (non-realities which have no fixed duration). ===== > 2) I believe that both sorts of reality, momentary and non- momentary, > can be directly apprehended, but not by everyone. ===== You seem to be focusing on the object rather than the process. My interpretation of the Mulapariyaya Sutta is that the process is critical but the object is irrelevant. ===== > 3) It is standard to apprehend momentary, five-sense-door objects > directly, though they are also grasped conceptually throught the mind-door in > order to think about them and communicate with regard to them. ===== I think that you are saying that realities are first directly known by all (uninstructed worldling, learners, Arahants, Buddha). This is not my understanding of the Mulapariyaya Sutta. My understanding of this Sutta is that the nature of the object (momentary or momentary) is irrelevant. What is important is the individual. Specifically, an uninstructed worldling will always suffer inital perversion of perception (sanna-vipallasa) with any type of object. Learners, Arahants and Buddhas do not suffer from inital perversion of perception (sanna-vipallasa), though Learners might still conceive the object. ===== > 4) As far as realities that are not momentary are concerned, they are > known by a non-arahant only indirectly through the thinking process and > concept construction. No non-arahant grasps relational realities directly. Thus, in > the non-arahant, the distinctions (a) between directly known and conceptually > known, (b) between ultimate truth and conventional truth, and (c) between > momentary and non-momentary all seem to coincide. Only an arahant, having > developed supermundane wisdom, has mental function so transformed as to be able to > apprehend non-momentary realities directly as well. ===== As mentioned above, my understanding of the Mulapariyaya Sutta is that all types of objects are mis-perceived by uninstructed worldings and all types of objects are directly known by Arahants (and Buddhas). ===== > 5) In a non-arahant, all cognitive functions, whether dealing with > momentary or non-momentary realities, are defiled by ignorance, and their objects > are misapprehended due to the "original sins" of reification and > subject-object duality. In an arahant, however, all realities, momentary and > non-momentary, are directly knowable without distortion, as they are, with pristine wisdom. ===== A learner (Sotapanna, Sakadagami, Anagami) will not suffer sanna- vipallasa as an initial response but may still be subject to conceiving. Metta, Rob M :-) 39361 From: Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 2:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi, Rob - In a message dated 12/5/04 10:07:12 AM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > 1) I believe that there are realities that are momentary > and realities > >of a relational nature that span many moments. It is not brevity > of duration > >that distinguishes actual from imagined. > > ===== > > I am not sure where you could find support for this position. As you > probably know, the Buddhist Theory of Moments did not really develop > until the twelfth century (see "Buddhist Psychology of Perception" > by E. R. Sarachchandra p42ff). Those things that are "momentary" are > considered in the Abhidhammattha Sangaha to be realities whereas > those things which span many moments are either rupa (17 moments) or > concepts (non-realities which have no fixed duration). > ====================== I'm not clear on what you are saying there is no support for, momentary realities or extended relational ones, or both. What I am questioning is the notion that to exist is to exist without duration. I don't think that exclusive momentaristic perspective on "reality" is expressed in the suttas. Perhaps not even in the Abhidhamma Pitaka. Could you please clarify what you are putting forward? With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39362 From: robmoult Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 7:13am Subject: [dsg] Re: Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Venerable Sir, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Bhante Vimalaramsi wrote: > Dhamma Greetings Rob M., > > One thing you need to understand is that before bhikkhu Nananada became > of monk, he was a Bhikkhu Unversity teacher and scholar. He taught > bhikkhus and was quite a scholar in his own right. He knew what he was > writing about and did this for a definite reason. Sorry he doesn't answer > your specific questions, but what book could? > > Maha-Metta > always > Bhante Vimalaramsi ===== I find no shortcomings or unanswered questions from this book. I think it is an excellent book. I apologize if my post implied otherwise. With great respect, Rob M :-) 39363 From: robmoult Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 7:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Ken O, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > Hi Rob M > > Are you saying that the aggregates do not exist? > ===== From SNXXII.94, it is clear that the Buddha said that the five aggregates do exist (Bhikkhu Bodhi's commentary explains that they exist as impermanent processes). As far as I know, this is the only time that the Buddha made an ontological statement regarding existence / non-existence. According to Bhikkhu Bodhi's commentary, the Buddha made this statement to refute a specific type of wrong view (illusionist theories that the world lacks existence). ===== > Everthything exist is one extreme - eternalism - because it includes > I that is why Buddha say everything exist is not true. Let me quote > you another sutta > Nidanasamyutta, SN II.17 The Naked Ascetic Kassapa > < who experiences [the result], [then one asserts] with reference to > one existing from the begining: "Suffering is created by oneself." > When one asserts thus, this amounts to eternalism.>> > > everthing does not exist is another extreme > << But Kassapa [if one thinks,] 'The one who act is one, the one who > experiences [the result] is another,' [then one asserts] with > reference to one stricken by feeling: "Suffering is created by > another.' When one asserts thus, this amounts to annihilationism.>> > because I really experience reality - that is why the experience we > have cannot be belong to another. > > Furthermore before the start of the sutta > <<"By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as its > object) a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when on > sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right > discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not > occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it > actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to > the world does not occur to one >> > > Existence here is reference to the world. While the sutta I quote > above is reference to a self. So Buddha is clear, he knows there is > existence but it is conditioned as said in D.O.. Existence > pertaining to the world, I are concepts, do not exist, not reality. > And non-existence is another extreme because there is reality, there > are conditions, there is feeling that is how we have experience the > flavour of an object from feeling. ===== Bhikkhu Bodhi explains in the commentary, that despite inital appearances, SNII.15 is not about "existence" and "non-existence" in an ontological sense. If we look at p734 of his commentary, it goes into some depth explaining that this Sutta is not about "existence" and "non-existence". The commentary refers back to the Pali roots of the words used to make clear the Buddha's true intention - to refute the ideas of eternalism and annihilationism. As you have pointed out, there are also other Suttas wherin the Buddha made a similar refutation. Probably the most famous is the Brahmajala Sutta (DN1), where the topic is discussed in depth. Ken O, Bhikkhu Bodhi's commentary on SNII.15 is a little long. Please let me know if you would like for me to type it out. ===== > > Regardless whether paramatha dhammas is a later convention used by > Abhidhammist, it serve as a convention to differentiate the five > aggregates + Nibbana are real, while the rest are just concepts. > Concept is not real. If concept is real, Buddha will have say self > exist, the world exist. However, feeling is real that is why it is > said in the D.O link., in refutation to a non-existence of reality. ===== In SNXXII.94 the Buddha did say that the five aggregates are real (in an ontological sense) to refute a specific wrong view. I am not aware of any Sutta where the Buddha said that concepts are "not real". If you are aware of any other ontological statements proclaimed by the Buddha, please advise. You raised the question of SNII.17 regarding feeling. Again, Bhikkhu Bodhi's commentary (p738) explains that the quadrilemma should be rejected because it stems from distortions (sannacittavipallasa and ditthivipallasa). Again, SNII.17 is not making ontological statements about the existence of feeling (in fact, it does not have to because SNXXII.94 clearly states that feeling exists). Metta, Rob M :-) 39364 From: Bhante Vimalaramsi Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 6:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Dhamma Greetings Andrew, One thing that I have learned about smiling and sending metta, and that is we never really know for sure when it will have an affect on another person. Metta doesn't work by our time frame. But the whole reason for smiling and sending metta is that your mind becomes peaceful right then right there if it is done correctly and this in itself is a great advantage. It may take a few or even many times to have an effect on a mentally retarded person. But remember when you are sincere in your efforts to smile and send metta it absolutely does have a positive affect on those around you. For example, I have many students in Malaysia who have practiced metta with me for intensive periods of time and they have continued on doing metta in their daily lives. When they go to work, their fellow work mates over time begin to see that their is a change in the way my students approach upsets and stress. Then they begin to talk to the students about why this is happening. They want the same kind of smiling face and want to learn about metta. Which shows a universal truth and that is "everyone wants to smile and be happy". This desire for this kind of life is chanda or a wholesome desire that points mind in the right direction and eventually to nibbana. But of course at first just wanting to seriously talk about the effects of this kind of change is a big step. You want to know something with 100% certainty that it works in the way you want it to. But outside of impermanence is there anything that is 100%? And how do you know that it doesn't work, because you can't see it happen in the way you want it to? Our time frame for things to work immediately is a part of the "western disease". In other words, "I want it, when I want it, right now" or it just doesn't work, but is this realistic? The thing about smiling and metta is, that we need to see things clearly, Lovingly-accept what is happening in the present moment and learn to have true equanimity in our mind. No demands, no desires, no controls, just simply smiling and wishing well to others. This helps us to have a mind that is free from unwholesome states and develops our mind to continually have a wholesome state in it. It does take lots of practice. When mind becomes more familiar with being uplifted, it then is easier to recognize the unwholesome states arise, and it is easier to let go of these unwholesome states. Thus directing mind to a wholesome object of metta and smiling, helps one to be more aware of what mind is doing in the present moment (this is using the whole 8-fold path, especially right effort). One can then begin to see just how tricky mind becomes and then begins to develop true equanimity and mental balance. This directly leads to the cessation of suffering. On this site there seems to be a real fear of "I", "me", "mine", and "self", but what I am talking about leads directly away from this false idea of a self. Try it seriously for a period of time and watch the magic happen. Sometimes it is subtle and sometimes you won't find out until later what effects may have been experienced for others. But that is a fun part of this practice. It may help to stop trying to be so analytical and demanding that reality arise the way you want it to. A lighter approach works much better. I have hesitated to bring this up on this website because it won't be understood very well. But what the heck, if you can develop a true sense of humor about being caught by unwholesome thoughts, and laugh at just how crazy mind truly is. This will change your perspective from this is mine, this is who "I" am (atta), to "Oh! it's only this mental state or feeling and it is not "mine" (anatta). Then it becomes easier to be truly aware and to let it go, with understanding i.e. no more problem with heavy emotional states. So not only does smiling help in one's awareness, but laughing does too. I do know that the intellectualizing people will come up with all kinds of reasons that one shouldn't do this, but I am talking about direct practice and direct experience. So now I'll sit back and watch as this causes a wave of protests and questions. But I'll laugh at them because the true difference between knowing and thinking that one knows is big. And you will never really know until you try it. Maha-Metta always Bhante Vimalaramsi 39365 From: robmoult Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 7:47am Subject: [dsg] Re: Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Rob - > > In a message dated 12/5/04 10:07:12 AM Eastern Standard Time, > rob.moult@j... writes: > > > 1) I believe that there are realities that are momentary > > and realities > > >of a relational nature that span many moments. It is not brevity > > of duration > > >that distinguishes actual from imagined. > > > > ===== > > > > I am not sure where you could find support for this position. As you > > probably know, the Buddhist Theory of Moments did not really develop > > until the twelfth century (see "Buddhist Psychology of Perception" > > by E. R. Sarachchandra p42ff). Those things that are "momentary" are > > considered in the Abhidhammattha Sangaha to be realities whereas > > those things which span many moments are either rupa (17 moments) or > > concepts (non-realities which have no fixed duration). > > > ====================== > I'm not clear on what you are saying there is no support for, > momentary realities or extended relational ones, or both. What I am questioning is the > notion that to exist is to exist without duration. I don't think that > exclusive momentaristic perspective on "reality" is expressed in the suttas. Perhaps > not even in the Abhidhamma Pitaka. Could you please clarify what you are > putting forward? ===== I am saying that in the Suttas and in the Abhidhamma Pitaka, there is no concept of momentary existence (of a reality) or extended existence (of a concept). The concept of realities as dhammas did not really start to gain ground (see Y. Karunadasa's essay on Dhamma Theory) until after the Suttas and in the Abhidhamma Pitaka and obviously, the duration of existence of dhammas (momentary or non- momentary) had to come later. Metta, Rob M :-) 39366 From: Bhante Vimalaramsi Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 6:50am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Dhamma Greetings Phil, Please remember that I am a teacher and sometimes a student needs to be shocked before they will start to see where their attachments are. Maha-Metta always Bhante Vimalaramsi 39367 From: Bhante Vimalaramsi Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 7:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Giving a Smile Dhamma Greetings Ken O, And where doesn't smiling fit in to what you are saying? Doesn't merriment include smiling? Also what is 8NP? Using letters instead of spelling out the words doesn't help. Maha-Metta always Bhante Vimalaramsi 39368 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 8:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Dear Rob, Thank you for your research. The word dhamma often stands for reality, as I understand it. I made a study of this word and also included the the Saddaniti, a grammar written by the Thera Aggava.msa of Pagan, in 1154. He quoted many meanings of dhamma found in the Tipitaka and also the Expositor. It may be of interest that he gave as one of the meanings of dhamma: paññatti, and this under the aspect of a name for a reality. I just quote: N: Words: pa~n~natti : designation, name, idea, notion. adhivacana (n): term attribute nirutti (f): interpretation, expression. The word pa~n~natti, concept, stands for name and for the idea expressed by a name or term. Names can designate what is reality in the absolute sense (paramattha dhammas, such as kusala, akusala, sound, etc.) and also what is not real in the absolute sense, such as person, house. > Nina. op 05-12-2004 04:35 schreef robmoult op rob.moult@j...: > I decided to read what the Buddha and Buddhaghosa said about this > topic. (snipped) > My quick literature search covered more than 7500 pages of primary > texts. From this quick literature search, I am coming to the > conclusion that "concept" and "reality" is not a central theme of > the Buddha's teaching. 39369 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 8:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: I'm back Dear Andrew and Azita, I am glad Azita that you are back and recovering. I thought of the Cooranites weekend. Hoping to hear more, Nina. op 05-12-2004 09:13 schreef Andrew op athel60@t...: > Dear Azita > > All the Cooranites were thinking of you this weekend and are glad to > know you are on the mend. 39370 From: Jim Anderson Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 0:13am Subject: Tipitakadharas of Myanmar [The following was originally posted to my Pali Study discussion group on Dec. 3. Nina and I thought it would be good to re-post it to DSG as well as to the Pali discussion group. My apologies to those who have received more than one copy. --Jim] Dear members, I recently came across this webpage on Tipi.takadharas of Myanmar which I thought might be of interest to you: http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/tpdkdhra.htm A Tipi.takadhara is a title given to one who has the whole Tipi.taka memorized. According to this webpage it has only been given to 11 bhikkhus in Myanmar from 1948 to 2001. In addition, there are other higher titles given to some of them, ie. Tipi.takakawida, Maha Tipi.takakawida, and Dhammabha.n.daagaarika. In 1982, I had the good fortune of meeting a young and brilliant Burmese bhikkhu (travelling in North America with the Sayadaw U Thilawunta) who had the whole Tipi.taka memorized except for the Yamaka and Pa.t.thaana which he still had to do. I'm not sure if he ever succeeded in getting the title of a Tipi.takadhara. His name is Ven. Ashin Thitzana which I don't see among the 11 but then he could be under a Pali name. He was supposed to have come back to Canada to teach me in particular starting about 1988 but it never came to pass as the conditions didn't seem right for it at the time and I called it off. We did have some letter exchanges and on the letterhead of his letters around 1986-7 is a list of his titles as follows: "dvipi.takadhara, dvipi.takakovida, saasanadhaja siriipavara dhammaacariya, paa.lipaaraguu" Best wishes, Jim Anderson 39371 From: m. nease Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 8:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Rob, ----- Original Message ----- From: "robmoult" To: Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2004 10:56 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts > That is, do >> you think that satipa.t.thaana can arise based equally on either? > If not, >> it hardly seems important to me whether or not 'concept and > reality' is a >> central theme; it suffices, for me, that understanding the > difference is >> crucial to understanding the central theme. What do you think? > Please see my recent reply to Bhante Vimalaramsi. I tend to equate > satipatthana with "directly knowing". I understand that I think--is there a difference, do you think, between what can and cannot be directly known? Could that difference be between concept and reality? If so, then isn't understanding (conceptually) that difference crucial to understanding (conceptually) the central theme? mike 39372 From: Bhante Vimalaramsi Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 7:50am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Dhamma Greetings Phil, The reason that I have my students smile is to help them have a more uplifted mind. With this lighter type of mind, joy has a better chance to arise. With joy in one's mind one's awareness sees much more clearly when the joy disappears and a heavier type of mental state arises (unwholesome). Smiling very much helps my students to recognize what is happening in the present moment. As Ken O says, "We live our life with patience, courage and faith even though the eradication of underlying tendencies can be a very gigantic challenge." Smiling is a way to help the meditator overcome the underlying tendencies for unwholesome states to arise and this is what 'right effort' is all about. First, recognizing that an unwholesome state has arisen (i.e. the smile has disappeared), next to let go of that unwholesome state and relax the tension caused by that state, next to bring up a wholesome state (smile again), and then to keep that wholesome state going. This takes real practice to develop and putting a sincere smile on one's face helps one to be able to recognize their mental states when they change. It is following the 8 Fold Path, because it changes one's perspective and helps the meditator's mindfulness to become sharper. Joy and smiling lead to a much finer type of awareness and mindfulness, these states help greatly to be able to watch minds tricky meanderings, so when the recognition of this wandering arises it can be let go of more quickly and more easily. This is another thing that Ken O said it a previous post. It is taken from the Visuddhi Magga: Gladness is characterized as gladdening (produced by others' success). Its function resides in being unenvious. It is manifested as the elimination of aversion (boredom). Its proximate cause is seeing beings' success. It succeeds when it makes aversion (boredom) subside, and it fails when it produces 'merriment'. Doesn't merriment imply smiling? To me it does! Eventually, one can develop the habit of smiling and it will become an automatic thing. But it does take practice to make perfect (if there is such a thing as perfect). Intentional putting a smile on one's face eventually leads to a keener awareness of the present moment. Try it you'll like it! Hope this helps Maha-Metta always Bhante Vimalaramsi 39373 From: Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 4:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi, Rob - In a message dated 12/5/04 10:48:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > I am saying that in the Suttas and in the Abhidhamma Pitaka, there > is no concept of momentary existence (of a reality) or extended > existence (of a concept). The concept of realities as dhammas did > not really start to gain ground (see Y. Karunadasa's essay on Dhamma > Theory) until after the Suttas and in the Abhidhamma Pitaka and > obviously, the duration of existence of dhammas (momentary or non- > momentary) had to come later. > ==================== Okay. I agree with that. My point is really not very different. The Buddha spoke of "things" of various sorts, treating them all as having a middle-way mode of existence constrained by impermanence and conditionality. He really didn't go into it any more than that, and, thus, it is that impermanent and conditioned nature of all phenomena that he seemed to consider to be of importance. I, myself, think that there are levels of existence and various modes and senses of existence. I even think that there is a perfectly reasonable sense in which the tree in my garden, which is a fiction in a sense, is also a reality in the other sense of there being a host of interrelated phenomena of a variety of sense-door types that correspond to and underlie it. To view the tree as an utter fiction, and to really view it that way, would be, in my opinion, to *reduce* our knowledge of reality. However, to understand that its existence is a derivative one adds to our knowledge of the way things are, I believe. In any case, what is absolutely a total fiction is any core of self-existence in that tree. The tree, to the extent that is a phenomenon of any sort, is dependent - dependent on conditions that led to it, dependent on its parts, dependent on the elementary sense-door dhammas that are the basis for it, and dependent on being cognized. The mode of existence of that tree is less fundamental than that of "it's" hardness, its perceived shape, color, etc, but it is still a type of (derivative) existence. I don't see why we can't countenance degrees and modes of existence instead of relying on a strict dichotomy of real vs fiction. But, as you correctly say, the Buddha didn't distinguish modes of existence or make much of the concept vs reality issue (in the commentarial sense), because that was not what he considered important. What he considered important was dukkha, the end of dukkha, and all that leads to that end. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39374 From: Larry Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 9:55am Subject: 3 stages of sati/Nina Hi Nina, In Vism.XIV,3 Buddhaghosa talks about the three modes of knowing: perception, consciousness, and wisdom. The archives are temporarily off-line and I can't find your notes on this paragraph. Do you remember which kind of consciousness is being referred to here? He says perception knows sense consciousness but doesn't know the general characteristics. Consciousness knows sense consciousness and the general characteristics but can't bring about the manifestation of the path. Wisdom knows sense consciousness, the general characteristics and can bring about "by endeavouring" the manifestation of the path. In Vism.XIV,7 he seems to be saying this knowing of wisdom is chiefly a matter of knowing the particular characteristics of objects (sabhava). This analysis doesn't exactly seem like a discrimination between delusion and understanding and the knowing of consciousness seems hard to categorize. I was wondering, since perception (sa~n~naa) is the proximate cause of sati, if this might be a "stages of the path" scheme in three stages. First there is identifying the object without proliferation. Then there is the _conventional_ understanding of the object as impermanent, unsatisfactory, and not self, i.e., body, breath, etc. is impermanent, unsatisfactory, not self. Then there is the penetration of conventional identity to the experience of nama and rupa as impermanent, unsatisfactory, and not self. Is this a reasonable explanation of what is meant by the knowing of consciousness here? Larry 39375 From: connieparker Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 10:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken o With apologies to All, mn: All--ALL--of 'my' 'insights' have just been noodling, thinking. I have yet to scratch the surface of the Buddhadhamma. c: ditto, mike! Does that make us Noodhists in the search for the naked truth? peace, connie 39376 From: connieparker Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 10:06am Subject: Re: I'm back Nice to see you again, Azita. Azita: Dhamma does help in these rather scary situations. To let go [kind of..] and know that there is nothing that can stop any vipakacitta from arising, just like now, is somehow releasing. Except, of course, when one is still throwing up 30 hours after anaesthetic ;-( c: Thanks for throwing up a reminder that all our situations are scary, maybe especially the pleasant ones - no refuge in lobha, but what a drug! best wishes, connie 39377 From: connieparker Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 10:07am Subject: Re: Evil thoughts (Howard) Hi, RobM, R:)bM: .....for those moments when I am being mindful or when I am radiating true metta, then I am reinforcing good habits. The key point here is that weight of the kamma depends on the strength of the volition at the moment. 99.999% of the time, I have akusala thoughts (clinging to sense data, clinging to existence, attachment to self view, etc.) but the kamma created is very weak because the volition is very weak. In that moment of pure metta, the volition is incredibly strong because I am "going against the natural flow". This incredibly strong volition associated with the kusala action creates incredibly powerful good kamma. >> c: ;) Sidestepping the accumulations / tendencies / kamma distinctions question, do you mean something like "when there is mindfulness or the radiation of metta, there is the accumulation of those cetasikas"? Seriously, is there a difference between developing and radiating metta... does radiation require jhana? peace, connie 39378 From: connieparker Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 10:07am Subject: Re: Lodewijk's speech - anusayas Hi, Phil - Ph: I read in one of your books that the quality of our birth depends on kamma, but our character depends on accumulations. c: A quote from Nina's SPD: << The javana viithi-cittas that are kusala and those which are kusala arise and fall away in succession and they accumulate kusala or akusala all the time. This conditions each person to have different inclinations, a different character and a different behaviour. The accumulations in the citta of each person are most intricate. Also the arahats, those who have reached perfection, have different inclinations, they excel in different qualities. Venerable Såriputta was preeminent in wisdom, venerable Mahaa Moggallaana in superpowers, venerable Mahaa Kassapa in the observance of ascetical practices, which he also encouraged others to observe, and venerable Anuruddha was preeminent in clairvoyance. The javana viithi-cittas of each one of us arrange themselves in their own series or continuity and accumulate different kinds of kusala and of akusala time and again, and this is the reason that, at the present time, we all think, speak and act in completely different ways. Cittas that are kusala, akusala and mahaa-kiriya which arrange themselves in a series of javana, cause people to have a different behaviour through body and speech. It could happen that people who saw an arahat had contempt for him because they judged him by his outward behaviour, which he had accumulated for an endlessly long time. The Brahman Vassakaara, the prime minister of Magadha, for example, made a serious mistake by misjudging an arahat from his outward behaviour. When he saw Mahaa Kacchana coming down from a mountain he said that Mahaa Kacchana behaved like a monkey. Vassakaara's haughtiness was conditioned by the accumulation of his javana viithi-cittas. The Buddha told him to ask Mahaa Kacchana forgiveness, but his accumulated conceit was the condition that he was unable to do so. The Buddha predicted that Vassakaara, after he had died, would be reborn as a monkey in a bamboo wood. Vassakaara had thereupon banana trees planted as well as other things monkeys could eat. Then his food would be all ready for him when he would be reborn as a monkey in that bamboo wood. We should see the danger of the accumulation of akusala in the javana viithi-cittas that arise and fall away in a succession of seven cittas. Akusala is accumulated time and again so that it becomes one's nature and appears in one's behaviour and speech and this accumulated behaviour is called in Paali: "vaasanaa" 2. Even when one has become an arahat there are inclinations accumulated in the citta that condition different kinds of behaviour. The Buddha is the only person who could eradicate "vaasanaa". All arahats have eradicated defilements completely so that not even a germ is left of them, but nevertheless they are unable to eradicate "vaasanaa". This is because they have accumulated "vaasanaa" for an endlessly long time in the cycle of birth and death through the power of javana viithi-cittas. >> I'll spare you my lousy puns and just pass on some definitions from PaliWords: vaasanaa: (f) former impression; recollection of the past vaasana: (nt) perfuming; making to inhabit vasana: (nt) dwelling; living; a cloth peace, connie 39379 From: jwromeijn Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 10:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Dear Rob and all What do you think of this theory: The two-truth model (conceptual and ultimate reality) is in fact a Mahayana-invention, or earlier a Nagarjuna-invention. And some Theravadins have, later, copied it. So that it is in fact not Theravadin? Another question is of the two-truth-model (or two-realities-model, that the same to me) is true; or when truth0doesn't exist, that is useful? To me it is useful, in the stage now of my path. Metta Joop 39380 From: jwromeijn Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 11:17am Subject: [dsg] Re: evolution. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Joop, Nina: The Tipitaka and commentaries do not have as purpose science, evolution theories or history. That is why these matters do not play a part in the teachings. The teachings touch on another aspect. The goal is detachment from the wrongt view of self and eradication of all defilements. Joop: I agree with you but I will also mention the consequences: The Tipitaka should not be seen as a collection of facts which can be used in formulating a theory about natural science, evolutionary theory or history. For example the chapter on Rupa of the Dhamma-Sangani is not an introduction to physics or chemics. Jataka-stories should not be seen as historical facts Even it's better not to give the Abhidhamma the name of 'psychology' because that can give the wrong impression that it can be compared with (modern) psychology as a scientific disipline. Metta Joop 39381 From: Bhante Vimalaramsi Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 10:32am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Dhamma Greetings Phil, Sorry, I mis-read the quote from the Visuddhi Magga so please forgive me. It was a mistake on my part. I don't mean to cause confusion. By including that statement. And as you might be able to tell, I am sure that smiling is a helpful tool to see how mind works. I've never revealed this publicly but I do have dyslexia and sometimes my mind misses whole sentences or things get changed around. Most of the time I read and re-read things before making comments but this time, I just misunderstood what was being said. Sorry again Maha-Metta always Bhante Vimalaramsi 39382 From: m. nease Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 0:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken o Hi Connie, ----- Original Message ----- From: "connieparker" To: "dsg" Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 10:07 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken o > > With apologies to All, > > mn: All--ALL--of 'my' 'insights' have just been noodling, thinking. I > have yet to scratch the surface of the Buddhadhamma. > > c: ditto, mike! Does that make us Noodhists in the search for the naked > truth? > peace, > connie HAR--I love it--I've often said I'm more nudist than Buddhist (figure painting etc. being an old avocation of mine)...just 'my accumulations'...seriously though, I think 'the naked truth' isn't such a bad metaphor for dhammas stripped of concepts. I have an idea that 'we' (being illusory if I'm not mistaken) can't experience them but, if abhidhamma is correct, satipa~n~naa can and will gradually eradicate the illusion of self and all its attendant dukkha. Here's Hoping, mike 39383 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 0:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: evolution. Dear friend James and Joop, op 03-12-2004 23:02 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@y...: > Friend Nina (and Joop), > > I remember a sutta that states something to the effect that the > planet used to be inhabited by entities of light but then they ate > the sludge of the oceans and gained material form (as humans?). N: Dialogues of the Buddha Diigha Nikaya III, no 27. A self-luminous being tasted the earth, and got a solid body, Etc. J:... Anyway, > it does seem to speak to evolution. However, I read some sources > which question the authenticity of that sutta as Buddha word, and I > have my doubts also. N: It is not a dogma. I think evolution does not have to be an issue or a problem. Nina. 39384 From: m. nease Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 0:37pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Andrew, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrew" To: Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2004 11:31 PM Subject: [dsg] Re: Concept and Reality in Primary Texts > I have just done a quick literature search of Swedish novels and, > because I did not find the word "lonely" very often, I am going to > conclude that "loneliness" is not a central theme of Swedish > literature. Nice reductio, though I'm not sure it's quite the same (still I appreciate it)-- > Would I be right? Certainly not. I believe it is an error to > conclude that quantitative language searches always translate to > qualitative ranking. Big mistake IMHO. Agreed-- > Because of the anatta and anicca teachings, the Buddha *had* to say > something like this: "Though the wise one has transcended the > conceived, he might still say 'I speak'. He might say too 'they > speak to me'. Skilful, knowing the world's parlance, he uses such > terms as mere expressions" [SN II 17]. This reminded me of: [The Exalted One:--] He of the Brethern who is Arahant, Who hath accomplished all there was to do, Who Drug-immune doth live the final life: He Might say thus: '"I" say'; 'they say 't is "mine."' So saying he, expert in usages Of men, 'ware of the worth of common names, Would speak merely conforming to such use. SN I 1 3 (PTS p21-22) I'm not sure whether 'concept and reality' is quite the same as 'sammuti sacca and paramattha sacca' as Howard referred to in his cheer-leading(!) remarks. That the latter pair refer to speech regarding the former pair does seem correct to me and this does seem to me (as I've said) to be important to conceptual understanding of the Dhamma and of dhammas. Just my opinion or view, of course--I think possibly the crux of this question (in part at least) is whether or not one takes all views to be micchadi.t.thi. In translation, sometimes the Buddha refers to 'holding right views' as a condition for favorable rebirths; whether this is a mistranslation of Paali meant as the cetasika that views rightly is, I think, a question for translators and a very interesting one. Thanks for the quote--looking forward to more of this discussion though I'm afraid I won't be able to participate much due to lack of time... mike 39385 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 1:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: evolution. Dear Joop, op 05-12-2004 20:17 schreef jwromeijn op jwromeijn@y...: > > Nina: The Tipitaka and commentaries do not have as purpose science, > evolution > theories or history. > Joop: I agree with you but I will also mention the consequences: > The Tipitaka should not be seen as a collection of facts which can be > used in formulating a theory about natural science, evolutionary > theory or history. N: Very well said, I could not agree more. J: For example the chapter on Rupa of the Dhamma-Sangani is not an > introduction to physics or chemics. N: I also repeated this very often!!! Glad you say it. > Jataka-stories should not be seen as historical facts N: The stories seem commentaries and the verses are Tipitaka, but I do not know for sure. I take them as lessons for daily life and do not think of history. J: Even it's better not to give the Abhidhamma the name of 'psychology' > because that can give the wrong impression that it can be compared > with (modern) psychology as a scientific disipline. N: Agree, agree!!! Nina. 39386 From: buddhatrue Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 1:08pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concept and Reality in Primary Texts --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Bhante Vimalaramsi wrote: > Dhamma Greetings James, > > Have you ever run across a book called 'Concepts and Reality' by > Venerable Nananada? It is worth a read, if you have the time and > inclination. Many bhikkhus place a great deal interest on this book. > > Maha-Metta > always > Bhante Vimalaramsi Bhante Vimalaramsi and All, Venerable Sir, no I have not read that book but I came home and found a very nice offer from Rob M. to mail a copy to me. Since I am in Egypt, and the mail service is practically non-existent or at the best donkey cart driven, I am not sure of my kamma to get this book ;-)). However, more importantly, why do you suggest I read it? Why is your post so cryptic and elusive as to your unspoken motivations and thoughts? Rob M. gave a very thorough and intelligent post addressing the nature of this book and you again gave a very cryptic response: "Sorry he doesn't answer your specific questions, but what book could?" Huh? Rob M. didn't ask any specific questions and I don't understand the point of this platitude type of question. Frankly, your posts about this book don't match the openness, friendliness, and frankness of your other posts. What's the deal? It seems we have a mystery and I am very intrigued! ;-)) Perhaps it will be as intriguing as "The Da Vinci Code"? ;-)) With that said, I think that Rob M. gave a very excellent analysis of the book in question (as far as a literary analysis goes, since that is all I can address). It seems that the book is predominately about mental proliferation, not the question of "concept" vs. "reality" so active in this group. If you would like to see an excellent example of this I suggest you view Rob M.'s ppt. presentation about the Noble Eightfold Path (available somewhere but I lost the link ;-). In that presentation, Rob M. gives the example of a rose and how a person can add layer upon layer of mental constructions to that rose until he/she can't really see the rose any longer, they see a concept. That is what the Buddha taught to avoid!! However, to go so far as to say that the rose doesn't even exist, that it is nothing more than the dhammas of color, hardness, cohesion, etc., is going way too far! As Gertruide Stein wrote, "A Rose is a Rose is a Rose" ;-)). (Sorry, the English Teacher in me is showing! ;-) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rose_is_a_rose_is_a_rose_is_a_rose. Metta, James P.S. To All: mentioning mental proliferation, it seems that the posts of this group are proliferating at a rate faster than I can address them! ;-)) To those who have addressed me specifically, please bear with me as I am quite busy with teaching duties at the moment. 39387 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 2:00pm Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi, Hugo I've been enjoying your posts. Mind if I butt in here? --- Hugo wrote: > > On Sat, 4 Dec 2004 04:11:55 +0000 (GMT), Ken O > wrote: > > SN is Samyutta Nikaya. > > Thanks. > > > k: Without veering towards either...the only way one understand > > ignorance.... is to have wise attention when such conditions arise > > and when they fall. Because any attempt in the believe that oneself > > can create more kusala behaviour there is veering to one extreme. > > Let me see if I understand correctly what you are saying. > > Are you saying that we can't create kusala behaviour at all? > > > > k: When one practise smiling, that smile is veer to oneside because > > one believe that such a smile can condition kusala behaviour on > > oneself or others. > > How would you explain the fact that my anger is extinguished once I > start smiling to myself? > > Emphasis on the word "fact", because I have experimented that not > once, but many times. Are you saying here that the smiling is kusala, and/or that with the extinguishmnet of the anger there is kusala in its place? It seems to me that unless kusala is being developed, then what we are talking about is just a handy 'anger management' technique. Less anger is obviously 'desirable' in many respects, but it doesn't necessarily mean less akusala, either right away or, more importantly, later, as I see it. Just a thought. Jon 39388 From: Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 9:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: evolution. In a message dated 12/5/2004 1:07:17 PM Pacific Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: J: Even it's better not to give the Abhidhamma the name of 'psychology' > because that can give the wrong impression that it can be compared > with (modern) psychology as a scientific disipline. N: Agree, agree!!! Nina. Hi Joop and Nina This is the first definition of science from the Random House College Dictionary... "a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws." Sounds like a great definition of the Tripitaka to me. When I think of science or psychology, I think of the Buddha's teaching as the Standard ... by which modern science and psychology are inefficiently trying to figure out. TG 39389 From: m. nease Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 2:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hello Again Larry, ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2004 8:24 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O > M: "This works well with some schools of Buddhism, I think, but not with > the Paali texts. I could be mistaken of course--I'd like to see a > reference supporting this idea from the Paali tipitaka." > > L: See Vism.XIV,130: > > "But though classed in the same way as consciousness, nevertheless, as > to characteristic, etc., it all has just the characteristic of > perceiving. Its function is to make a sign as a condition for perceiving > again that 'this is the same', as carpenters, etc., do in the case of > timber, and so on. It is manifested as the action of interpreting by > means of the sign as apprehended, like the blind who 'see' an elephant > (Ud. 68-69). Its proximate cause is an objective field in whatever way > that appears, like the perception that arises in fauns that see > scarecrows as men." > > L: "Sign" is concept I believe. Aside from 'lakkhaana' as 'non-concretely produced' ruupa which, according to BB in CMA is not paramattha dhamma, I don't have a clue. Maybe you're right... > As for concept being the "beginning and end of all delusion", failure to > 'see' the three characteristics and understand the Four Noble Truths > could reasonably be said to be an error of complex judgement but the > following definition of pa~n~na suggests to me that it is simply a > matter if concept vs. reality, which amounts to sa~n~naa vs. pa~n~na, in > my mind. > > Vism.XIV,7 "What are its characteristic, function, manifestation and > proximate cause? Understanding has the characteristic of penetrating the > individual essences of states. Its function is to abolish the darkness > of delusion, which conceals the individual essences of states. It is > manifested as non-delusion. Because of the words 'One who is > concentrated knows and see correctly' (A.v,3), its proximate cause is > concentration." > > L: Granted pa~n~na doesn't abolish sa~n~naa but sa~n~naa does very > plainly conceal sabhava. Pa~n~na abolishes the belief or clinging to > concept and sa~n~naa interprets all experience conceptually. Does it? Can't sa~n~naa arise with pa~n~naa (in fact, doesn't it always)? Concealing is a function of moha, I think, which can't arise with pa~n~naa. > That sa~n~naa arises with lokuttara cetasikas suggests to me that path > consciousness is not void of concept. It certainly isn't devoid of vitakka, as vitakka is a synonym for sankappa. And vitakka can take a concept as an object, but with maggacitta? Or vipassanaa? I don't think so. > The point of path process is not > to "get real" but to stop desiring. Isn't it to end rebirth? The third noble truth isn't 'the cessation of lobha', (though it does end lobha) is it ? It's the cessation of dukkha. Lobha (tanha) is the origin of dukkha, but nibbaana is the cessation of dukkha, not the cessation of the origin of dukkha. An awkward construction but do you see what I mean? > So it seems reasonable that concept > would be involved in that insight. You may be right; but what I've read seems pretty conclusively to state that insight and concept are mutually exclusive. > I don't see a problem with nibbana > being an object of sa~n~na. Right--has to be, I think-- > That conceptualizing of nibbana is surely > instrumental in the understanding to the effect that the path is > completed. Nibbaana arises for only one moment, I think (when 'it' would naturally be 'marked' by sa~n~naa as that is one of sa~n~naa's functions)--I don't see why the reviewing after nibbaana might not take a concept (the memory of nibbaana?) as an object--but I really don't know. mike 39390 From: Andrew Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 2:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > > Hi Rob K, > > > Bhikkhu Bodhi's commentary (p734, n29) explains that the > Kaccanagotta Sutta is not ontologically focused, but rather states > that, in this Sutta, the Buddha is rejecting both eternalism and > annihilationism. > > In other words, if we are looking for ontological statements from > the Buddha, we should focus on SN XXII.94. From this Sutta, I > conclude that the Buddha was aware of ontological issues of > existence vs. non-existence. Bikkhu Bodhi's commentary says that: > > "[the] "Middle Teaching" can accomodate definite pronouncements > about these ontological issues. The affirmation of the existence of > the five aggregates, as impermanent processes, serves as a rejoinder > to illusionist theories, which hold that the world lacks real being. > > > > I again state that ontology is not at the core of the Buddha's > teachings. Though it is clear from this Sutta reference that the > Buddha was aware of ontological issues, He only made one ontological > statement (existence of the five aggregates as impermanent > processes) to refute a specific wrong view (illusionist theories). Hi to the 2 Robs Bhikkhu Bodhi's n 29 to the Kaccanagotta Sutta includes: "... In view of these explanations it would be misleading to translate the two terms *atthita* and *natthita* simply as "existence" and "nonexistence" and then to maintain (as is sometimes done) that the Buddha rejects all ontological notions as inherently invalid. The Buddha's utterances at 22:94, for example, show that he did not hesitate to make pronouncements with a clear ontological import when they were called for. In the present passage *atthita* and *natthita* are abstract nouns formed from the verbs *atthi* and *natthi*. It is thus the metaphysical assumptions implicit in such abstractions that are at fault, not the ascriptions of existence and nonexistence themselves ..." RobM, isn't BB saying something a bit more than that the Buddha was *aware* of ontological issues? That he actually got involved in them? Best wishes Andrew 39391 From: robmoult Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 4:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Andrew, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: of existence and nonexistence themselves ..." > > RobM, isn't BB saying something a bit more than that the Buddha was > *aware* of ontological issues? That he actually got involved in them? You are absolutely correct. The Buddha did get involved - the Buddha made a single ontological statement to counter a specific wrong view. My point is that the Buddha's teaching was not focused on realities and non-realities (concepts). Acariya Anuruddha used ultimate realities as a structure to summarize the Abhidhamma when he wrote the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, but ultimate realities are not an element of the Buddha's teaching. A cursory reading of the Abhidhammattha Sangaha gives the incorrect impression that ontological issues (realities vs. non-realities) is an important part of the Buddha's teaching. Metta, Rob M :-) 39392 From: robmoult Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 4:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Rob, > Thank you for your research. > The word dhamma often stands for reality, as I understand it. I made a study > of this word and also included the the Saddaniti, a grammar written by the > Thera Aggava.msa of Pagan, in 1154. He quoted many meanings of dhamma found > in the Tipitaka and also the Expositor. It may be of interest that he gave > as one of the meanings of dhamma: paññatti, and this under the aspect of a > name for a reality. I just quote: > > > adhivacanaadhammaa"ti-aadiisu pa~n~nattiya.m. > > In such passages as dhamma that is a designation, dhamma that is an > expression, > dhamma that is a term, dhamma means concept.> > > N: Words: > pa~n~natti : designation, name, idea, notion. > adhivacana (n): term attribute > nirutti (f): interpretation, expression. > The word pa~n~natti, concept, stands for name and for the idea expressed by > a name or term. Names can designate what is reality in the absolute sense > (paramattha dhammas, such as kusala, akusala, sound, etc.) and also what is > not real in the absolute sense, such as person, house. > Did the Buddha ever contrast "dhamma" (meaning reality or name of reality) with "non-dhamma" (meanining non-reality or name of non- reality)? In other words, did the primary texts make ontological statements (other than SNXXII.94)? In my opinion, if there are only one or two instances of the Buddha making ontological statements, then I will surmise that reality vs. non-reality is not a key issue in His teachings. Metta, Rob M :-) 39393 From: antony272b2 Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 5:09pm Subject: Re: Tipitakadharas of Myanmar Dear Jim, "Candidates are tested on the doctrinal understanding, comparative philosophy, textual discrimination, taxonomic grouping and analysis and on the interrelationships." "In undertaking the assignments, the Venerable Sayadaw did not just read through the texts with the committee but sought out the different versions, brought out the reference in the Commentaries and Sub-commentaries, explained the implications to the clear understanding of the committee members, sought a unanimous conclusion and wrote the report." http://www.aimwell.org/Books/Library/Suttas/Paritta/BioMingun/biomingu n.html Best wishes / Antony. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Anderson" wrote: > Dear members, > > I recently came across this webpage on Tipi.takadharas of Myanmar > which I thought might be of interest to you: > > http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/tpdkdhra.htm > > A Tipi.takadhara is a title given to one who has the whole Tipi.taka > memorized. According to this webpage it has only been given to 11 > bhikkhus in Myanmar from 1948 to 2001. In addition, there are other > higher titles given to some of them, ie. Tipi.takakawida, Maha > Tipi.takakawida, and Dhammabha.n.daagaarika. > > In 1982, I had the good fortune of meeting a young and brilliant > Burmese bhikkhu (travelling in North America with the Sayadaw U > Thilawunta) who had the whole Tipi.taka memorized except for the > Yamaka and Pa.t.thaana which he still had to do. I'm not sure if he > ever succeeded in getting the title of a Tipi.takadhara. His name is > Ven. Ashin Thitzana which I don't see among the 11 but then he could > be under a Pali name. He was supposed to have come back to Canada to > teach me in particular starting about 1988 but it never came to pass > as the conditions didn't seem right for it at the time and I called it > off. We did have some letter exchanges and on the letterhead of his > letters around 1986-7 is a list of his titles as follows: > > "dvipi.takadhara, dvipi.takakovida, saasanadhaja siriipavara > dhammaacariya, paa.lipaaraguu" > > Best wishes, > Jim Anderson 39394 From: robmoult Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 5:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Mike, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "m. nease" wrote: > > That is, do > >> you think that satipa.t.thaana can arise based equally on either? > > If not, > >> it hardly seems important to me whether or not 'concept and > > reality' is a > >> central theme; it suffices, for me, that understanding the > > difference is > >> crucial to understanding the central theme. What do you think? > > > Please see my recent reply to Bhante Vimalaramsi. I tend to equate > > satipatthana with "directly knowing". > > I understand that I think--is there a difference, do you think, between what > can and cannot be directly known? Could that difference be between concept > and reality? If so, then isn't understanding (conceptually) that difference > crucial to understanding (conceptually) the central theme? The Mulapariyaya Sutta (Mn1) contrasts: - the thinking process of uninstructed worldlings - the thinking process of learners (Sotapanna, Sakadagami, Anagami) - the thinking process of Arahants - the thinking process of Buddhas The Sutta goes through 24 different object of thought, everything from earth / water / fire / wind (what the Abhidhammatta Sangaha would call ultimate realities) to beings / gods (what the Abhidhammatta Sangaha would call concepts). There is no difference in the thinking process of an uninstructed worldling when faced with what the Abhidhammatta Sangaha would call ultimate realities as compared to the thinking process of an uninstructed worldling when faced with what the Abhidhammatta Sangaha would call concepts. There is also no difference in the way that learners think about "realities" as compared to the way that learners think about "concepts". The same holds true for Arahants and Buddhas. In summary, the type of object ("reality vs. "concept") does not play a role in the pattern of thinking. Mike, this is based on my analysis of a single Sutta. My analysis could well be wrong (it would not be the first time :-) ). I will keep my eyes open for any refrences in the primary texts that place importance on different objects of awarenss. Metta, Rob M :-) 39395 From: robmoult Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 5:23pm Subject: Re: Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Joop, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jwromeijn" wrote: > What do you think of this theory: > The two-truth model (conceptual and ultimate reality) is in fact a > Mahayana-invention, or earlier a Nagarjuna-invention. > And some Theravadins have, later, copied it. So that it is in fact > not Theravadin? ===== I do not know enough Buddhist history to make a statement. What is important to me is that the two-truth model as you call it is not central to the primary texts. Which group originated the idea and who might of copied it from whom is of some intellectual interest, but not a key issue for me. ===== > Another question is of the two-truth-model (or two-realities- model, > that the same to me) is true; or when truth doesn't exist, that is > useful? To me it is useful, in the stage now of my path. ===== Joop, I am not clear on your question. Are you asking if truth exists? I equate the Buddha's teaching with the truth. Are you asking if the Buddha's teaching exists? If so, how do you want to define existence? I am confused... :-) Metta, Rob M :-) 39396 From: Andrew Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 5:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > > Hi Andrew, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" > wrote: > of existence and nonexistence themselves ..." > > > > RobM, isn't BB saying something a bit more than that the Buddha > was > > *aware* of ontological issues? That he actually got involved in > them? > > You are absolutely correct. The Buddha did get involved - the Buddha > made a single ontological statement to counter a specific wrong view. > > My point is that the Buddha's teaching was not focused on realities > and non-realities (concepts). Acariya Anuruddha used ultimate > realities as a structure to summarize the Abhidhamma when he wrote > the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, but ultimate realities are not an > element of the Buddha's teaching. A cursory reading of the > Abhidhammattha Sangaha gives the incorrect impression that > ontological issues (realities vs. non-realities) is an important > part of the Buddha's teaching. Hi Rob M Bit slow this morning (not surprising after our Dhamma discussion weekend). Are you saying that the Buddha took an ontological position, but only as a "technique" to counter one particular wrong view? This reminds me of Ven Thanissaro's take on anatta a wee bit ... I also take it that you and Howard consider that the ignorance of being fooled by concepts is linked to self-view (which BB links to clinging which is conditioned by craving which is conditioned by a more basic level of ignorance). You have searched in vain for a reference where the Buddha states that this basic ignorance includes an inability to distinguish the *existent* 5 sense-bases and mind ("the world in the Noble One's Discipline") from the *nonexistent* rest. Therefore, you conclude that an ability to so distinguish is not an important part of the Dhamma. How does this sit with your view expressed to Mike that the object of citta doesn't matter (presumably it's the understanding that matters). Can you have your cake (it's the understanding that matters) and eat is as well (it doesn't matter if you don't understand the difference between existent and nonexistent)? I don't know for sure if this is a fair question to pose to you, but I'll post it anyway with apologies in advance! (-: Best wishes Andrew PS my BB reference is note 8 SN Vol 1 p 728. 39397 From: Jonathan Pettigrew Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 2:49pm Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Dear Bhante - what a lovely post :x Thank You! Jonathan Bhante Vimalaramsi wrote: Dhamma Greetings Phil, The reason that I have my students smile is to help them have a more uplifted mind. ... 39398 From: m. nease Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 5:46pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Rob, ----- Original Message ----- From: "robmoult" To: Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 5:13 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Thanks for your patience--as you know, I'm not the scholar that you are. I'll try responding below: > The Mulapariyaya Sutta (Mn1) contrasts: > - the thinking process of uninstructed worldlings > - the thinking process of learners (Sotapanna, Sakadagami, Anagami) > - the thinking process of Arahants > - the thinking process of Buddhas It's been a while since I read it, I'll have another look-- > The Sutta goes through 24 different object of thought, everything > from earth / water / fire / wind (what the Abhidhammatta Sangaha > would call ultimate realities) to beings / gods (what the > Abhidhammatta Sangaha would call concepts). OK-- > There is no difference in the thinking process of an uninstructed > worldling when faced with what the Abhidhammatta Sangaha would call > ultimate realities as compared to the thinking process of an > uninstructed worldling when faced with what the Abhidhammatta > Sangaha would call concepts. That makes sense to me--he/she wouldn't see any difference between the two, I would think... > There is also no difference in the way that learners think > about "realities" as compared to the way that learners think > about "concepts". Wouldn't a sotaapanna think about wrong view, envy, avarice and doubt differently from the way a puthujjana would? Or do I misunderstand what you mean by 'the way they think'? Never mind, I think I see what you mean--so a learner of any level would, let's say, 'see' the three characteristics in such as 'beings' just as in PD's? Would that learner be able to experience insight--satipa.t.thaana vipassanaa--with regard to what the ADS calls 'concepts'? Would insights founded on what ADS calls concepts eradicate defilements? > The same holds true for Arahants and Buddhas. As above-- > In summary, the type of object ("reality vs. "concept") does not > play a role in the pattern of thinking. I think the 'pattern of thinking' may be my sticking point here. I'm talking about sabhaava, I guess--and assuming that a learner would think about sasabhaava dhammas differently from asabhaava dhammas (if such a distinction can be properly said to exist). Could you explain what you mean by 'pattern of thinking'? Now that I think of it, this has implications for 'the learner', the arahant and the Buddha, too--in sammuti sacca, the learner, the arahant and the Buddha exists and thinks; in vohaara sacca, the thinking (vitakka-vicaara?) exists but not the thinkers. Do you think this sammuti/vohaara distinction is an error in the texts? Or do you think its basis is in something other than pa~n~natti/paramattha dhamma? Do continue, please... > Mike, this is based on my analysis of a single Sutta. My analysis > could well be wrong (it would not be the first time :-) ). I will > keep my eyes open for any refrences in the primary texts that place > importance on different objects of awarenss. Thanks, Rob--I know my questions are all pretty elementary to you, but I find it helpful (I THINK) to try to articulate them. Hope you don't mind taking the time for a few more answers. mike 39399 From: kenhowardau Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 5:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Hi Howard, ------------------- H: > If you do not think that the view that there is no practice to be willfully done, and none that *can* be so done, is not a view of helplessness and hopelessness, then simply dismiss my perspective as nonsense. That is certainly your prerogative. > -------------------- Dhamma-practice (satipatthana) does contain the mental factor, cetana (volition). So does every other moment of consciousness. But it would be wrong to read into that, the idea of a free will (a will free from the constraints of conditionality). When I say 'it would be wrong' I mean that interpretation of the Tipitaka would certainly be contrary to the interpretation spelt out in the ancient commentaries. In an age when just about everyone claims to be an interpreter of the Tipitaka and an authority on Buddhist meditation, the ancient commentaries are a rare bastion for right view. I shouldn't appoint myself as "Defender of the Commentaries" but nor should I feel obliged to hold my tongue. James has said he would rather I didn't respond to his posts, and I gather you, too, are tired of my "gainsaying." But, in the eyes of some readers, silence does give consent. In a group portraying itself as "Tipitaka and Commentaries based" the inference that the commentaries peddle hopelessness, helplessness and wrong view will not go unnoticed. So, again, for the record, I disagree. :-) Kind regards, Ken H 39400 From: plnao Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 5:53pm Subject: Metta through the Noble Truths Hello all I was at the supermarket this morning when a feeling of great friendliness washed over me. I get that quite often at the supermarket. All the people coming to buy things to satisfy their needs, both wholesome needs for nutrition, and all those cravings. This got me thinking - again- that if and when we have insight into the Noble Truths, doesn't metta arise naturally? How can we not have a friendly "we're in the same boat" feeling when we see the way people (including ourselves) are hurried through life by craving for being, cravings for sensual pleasure, how we are all swung this way and that by the worldly concerns. How can we not feel friendliness when we realize, yet again, that we will all get sick, grow old (if we're lucky) and die, that we will be torn away from the things we love, and forced to be with things that cause us displeasure? It is so hard to be a human being. How can we not feel friendliness when understanding of the above arises in even a shallow way the way it does for me. We often see phrasing like "that person wants the same things I do, he fears what I do, he wants to be happy the way I do....why shouldn't I wish him happiness", or words to that effect. Dhammapada has "all beings tremble at the the rod etc". And it seems to me that when we realize "that person wants the same things I do" there is no need to go on to that next step of wishing him happiness. That metta will arise conditioned by any degree of insight we have in to the First and Second Noble Truths, or so it seems to me, lately. My insight into the Noble Truths is very shallow indeed, as demonstrated by the supermarket metaphor. As my insight deepens into the Noble Truths, I have a hunch metta will arise all the more easily. How could it not? As our insight deepens into the brilliance of the Buddha's teaching as revealed in his first discourse, as our appreciation for the way of liberation that He offers us through this teaching deepens, how can we not have friendly thoughts for all living beings? I know that the Buddha *did* teach the Metta Sutta, so there is a good reason for it. Perhaps it's for the days when metta does not arise through insight. But I would rather do without metta on those days and see the dosa-drenched stretches for what they are - annica, dukkha, anatta. Again, I know I am just repeating myself here, and it's pretty trite, but wanted to get this down. Metta, Phil p.s does anyone know how to say "we're in the same boat" in Pali? (only half joking!) Does a similar phrase appear in the Suttanta anywhere? I guess that "all beings tremble at the rod" comes close. p.p.s hello and thanks to all who sent me messages. Busy days here. I have flagged them and will get back gradually! 39401 From: Andrew Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 6:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Dear Bhante Thank you indeed for your advice which I will take time to ponder and experiment with. I don't expect your post will incite a riot on DSG but if it does, I too will have a laugh about it. I will make one comment at the moment just for the sake of clarity. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Bhante Vimalaramsi wrote: [trim]> It may help to stop trying to be so analytical and demanding that reality > arise the way you want it to. This is one area I have been exploring with interest - how does reality arise? Conditionality. To what extent do conditioned states arise because of willing them to arise? To what extent do states arise when right understanding is present (and strong willing is not)? Many suttas tell us that "right understanding comes first". My belief (at present and speaking conventionally) is that when there is right understanding, I seem to have no inclination to for example break sila. Analysis is not required. But when I "force" myself to keep a precept in the face of an inclination not to, I experience feelings of aversion or shame or inferiority conceit (and probably a strong sense of self). I usually have to convince myself to behave using analysis. Thus, my experience links analytical-ness to heavy willing; and non-analytical-ness to understanding. But I believe there is a link between the two - that hearing and reflecting upon the true Dhamma is important to conditioning right understanding, periods of which then have no need of analysis. With respect Andrew 39402 From: Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 1:46pm Subject: The Rose [James] Hi, James - In a message dated 12/5/04 4:09:29 PM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > However, to go so far as to say that the rose doesn't even > exist, that it is nothing more than the dhammas of color, hardness, > cohesion, etc., is going way too far! ==================== Yes, there is a rose, but with an existence even more tenuous and ungraspable than the color, hardness, cohesion etc that interrelatedly underlie it and the mind that strains to see it as a unity. The rose is empty of own being and is never directly encountered. Yet it is not nothing. A host of past and presently observed phenomena underlie what we name "rose". Our mind imputes upon that aggregate of passing bubbles the name 'rose' and treats it as a self-existent entity. The rose exists, and yet ... how exactly it exists is important to see. In one sense, it exists as the universal flux proclaiming "See me here and now in this form that joins mind to fellow flashings in the void. Now you see me, now you don't. Catch me if you can!" With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39403 From: robmoult Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 6:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Andrew, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: > Bit slow this morning (not surprising after our Dhamma discussion > weekend). Are you saying that the Buddha took an ontological > position, but only as a "technique" to counter one particular wrong > view? This reminds me of Ven Thanissaro's take on anatta a wee > bit ... ===== Yup! As you quoted Bhikkhu Bodhi's commentary, "The Buddha's utterances at 22:94, for example, show that he did not hesitate to make pronouncements with a clear ontological import when they were called for." In SNXXII.94, it was appropriate for the Buddha to make an ontological statement to counter a specific type of wrong view. Don't know enough about Ven Thanissaro's take on anatta to comment. ===== > > I also take it that you and Howard consider that the ignorance of > being fooled by concepts is linked to self-view (which BB links to > clinging which is conditioned by craving which is conditioned by a > more basic level of ignorance). ===== Not sure about Howard :-), but being fooled by all objects (what the Abhidhammattha Sangaha calls "realities" or what the Abhidhammattha Sangaha calls "concepts") is a two-stage process (see Mulapariyaya Sutta, Mn1): First Stage (Initial Response) ============================== The uninstructed worldling is subject to perceiving (i.e. perversion of perception due to sanna-vipallasa) for all types of objects ("concept" or "reality"). This type of being fooled is linked to self-view. Learners (Sotapanna, Sakadagmi, Anagami) do not perceive, they directly know all types of objects ("concept" or "reality"). Second Stage (Conceptual / Emotive Response) ============================================ The uninstructed worldling delights in the object ("concept" or "reality") because he has not fully understood the object. This delighting in the object is not rooted in self-view because the learner (Sotapanna, Sakadagmi, Anagami) also has the possibility of delighting in the object and the learner has uprooted self-view. This type of being fooled by an object (all types of object, "concept" or "reality") is rooted in ignorance. ===== > You have searched in vain for a > reference where the Buddha states that this basic ignorance includes > an inability to distinguish the *existent* 5 sense-bases and mind > ("the world in the Noble One's Discipline") from the *nonexistent* > rest. Therefore, you conclude that an ability to so distinguish is > not an important part of the Dhamma. ===== I have searched in vain (well amost vain, Rob K did identify one example) of the Buddha making ontological statements of "existence". I therefore conclude that focusing on ontological issues is not a key to understanding the Buddha's teaching. ===== > > How does this sit with your view expressed to Mike that the object of > citta doesn't matter (presumably it's the understanding that matters). > > Can you have your cake (it's the understanding that matters) and eat > is as well (it doesn't matter if you don't understand the difference > between existent and nonexistent)? ===== The Mulapariyaya Sutta states that the uninstructed worldling takes delight in the object because he has not fully understood the object. The learner is encouraged not to take delight in the object in order that they may fully understand the object (of course, the Arahant and the Buddha fully understand the object). So what does it mean to "fully understand" an object (again, this applies to all types of objects, both "realities" and "concepts")? The commentary to the Mulapariyaya Sutta lists three progressive stages of "full understanding" (parinna): - the full understanding of the known (nataparinna) - the full understanding of scrutinization (tiranaparinna) - the full understanding of abandoning (pahanaparinna) The full understanding of the known means to analyze the object into constituent 'dhammas' and delimit the specific characteristic, function, manifestation and proximate cause of each dhamma. This process allows one to overcome the delusion of substantial unities. In other words, all things are made up of impersonal components brought together by conditions. Please note that in this series of messages, I am not rejecting the value of breaking things into constituent dhammas, I am only rejecting the value of attributing an ontological "reality" to these dhammas. The full understanding of scrutinization involves seeing the three characterisitic (impermanence, suffering and non-self) to overcome the delusion of permanance, pleasurable and self. At the stage of the full understanding of abandoning, desire and lust of objects is eliminated. ===== > > I don't know for sure if this is a fair question to pose to you, but > I'll post it anyway with apologies in advance! (-: ===== I hope that I answered your questions. Metta, Rob M :-) 39404 From: m. nease Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 7:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" Hi Sarah, ----- Original Message ----- From: "sarah abbott" To: Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 12:10 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" > S: I'm not sure which translation of the Kitagiri sutta you're using. Is > 'reflective understanding' 'dhammà nijjhàna.m khamanti' in the text below? > Usually where it gives 'he memorizes', I think the Pali is 'upaparikkhati' > which according to the Buddhadatta dictionary, means 'he investigates or > he examines'. For 'nijjhaayati', this dictionary gives 'he reflects'. I am > not familiar enough with the Pali to know whether it is conceptual or not > necessarily so. > From the PTS Pali dict: > Nijjhayati1 (p. 356) [Sk. nidhyayati, ni+jhayati1] to meditate, reflect, > think S III.140 sq. (+passati, cp. janati), 157; M I.334 (jhayati n. > apajjhayati); III.14 (id.). Cp. upa°. > > Perhaps you can give us your comments or translation of the key Pali terms > in the passage, Mike! For nijjhaayati, I have 'meditates; frets; reflects'. Like you I simply don't know if this refers to cetasikas or to pa.n.natti. > Btw (and as a diversion from the main thread), of interest is a line in > MN50 referring to a group of ascetics with wrong view and practice (BB > transl here) which uses the same word nijjhaayati, I think: > .. > "'These bald-pated recluses, these swarthy menial offspring of the > Kinsman's feet, claim: "We are meditators, we are meditators!" and with > shoulders drooping, heads down and all limp, they meditate, premeditate, > out-meditate, and mismeditate. > > "Just as an owl on a branch waiting for a mouse meditates, premeditates, > out-meditates, and mismeditates, or just as a jackal on a river-bank > waiting for fish meditates, premeditates, out-meditates, and mismeditates, > or just as a cat by a door-post or a dust-bin or a drain, waiting for a > mouse, meditates, premeditates, out-meditates, and mismeditates, or just > as a donkey unladen, standing by a door-post or a dust-bin or a drain > meditates, premeditates, out-meditates, and mismeditates, so too, these > bald-pated recluses, these swarthy menial offspring of the Kinsman's feet, > claim: "We are meditators, we are meditators!" and with shoulders > drooping, heads down and all limp, they meditate, premeditate, > out-meditate, and mismeditate.'" > *** > The Pali for these terms used here is 'jhaayanti, pajjhaayanti, > *nijjhaayanti*, apajjhaayanti'. Interesting...certainly doesn't sound like they're practicing either jhaana or satipa.t.thaana...more like thinking and fretting...describes the appearance of several of my fellow meditators back when to a 'T'--of course my own appearance was exemplary...! > See also MN108 which uses the same terms in: > > "'What kind of meditation did the Blessed One not praise? Here Brahmin, > someone abides with his mind obsessed by sensual lust, a prey to sensual > lust, and he does not understand as it actually is the escape from arisen > sensual lust. While he harbours sensual lust within, he meditates, > premeditates, out-meditates, and mismeditates.'" > *** Since the someone here has not even suppressed the defilements, he obviously isn't in jhaana-- > It continues with a description of 'the meditation of one whose mind is > obsessed by the five hindrances', to quote from B.Bodhi's note. Right-- > Back to the Kitagiri sutta (where of course the Pali terms are referring > to 'samma' ditthi) - all I can say is that the passage is a description of > suta mayaa pa~n~naa, cintaa mayaa pa~n~naa and bhaavanaa mayaa pa~n~naa, > as I see it, which Sukin referred to in his recent helpful post on > pa~n~naa to Bhante V. > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/38585 > > These are all kinds of pa~n~naa/samma di.t.thi, but only the latter refers > to the development of satipatthana which is not conceptual. The > pin-pointing is not as important as the understanding that these three > kinds of samma ditthi reinforce each other. Well, that's the assumption you and I have been making, I think--but is it justified by the texts? I'm still not convinced that I've seen a citation supporting the idea of a 'right view' as opposed to the cetasika that 'views rightly', in other words a conceptual, a priori, presumptive view that is right. If I understand Dan and others correctly, such a view is inevitably wrong because it is alakkha.na asabhaava etc. > Without hearing/listening/having 'wise' access to the teachings (suta > mayaa pa~n~naa), there won't be any wise reflection (cintaa mayaa > pa~n~naa). Without the latter, there won't be any development of the path > (bhaavanaa mayaa pa~n~naa). Wise reflection here is the wise consideration > about concepts of dhammas (i.e namas and rupas) such as now while we talk. From Khun Sujin's 'Deeds of Merit' at http://www.buddhadhamma.org/book/Deeds_of_Merit/Chapter2.htm : We read in the Dialogues of the Buddha (III, 33, The Recital ), under the Threes (item 43) of the Recital: Three kinds of knowledge: cinta-mayaa-pannaa, pannaa accomplished by thinking, sutta-mayaa-pannaa, pannaa accomplished by listening, bhaavanaa-mayaa-pannaa, pannaa accomplished by mental development. This seems unequivocal, does anyone think that the first two are di.t.thi in the sense of micchadi.t.thi, or that this is a bad translation? If anyone thinks that these are somehow antithetical to sammaadi.t.thi (or even to the bhaavanaa-mayaa-pannaa), I'd like to know how... > ..... > M:>..and that the concept >> might be a decisive support condtion (upanissaya paccaya*) for >> satipa.t.thaana or even maggacitta? I think this is more or less the >> way I've been thinking about it. If so it hardly matters whether it's >> called 'sammaadi.t.thi' or not, it is conceptual, unique to the >> Buddhadhamma and priceless, or so it seems to me. > ..... > S: I couldn't agree more with you and all your comments. I've always > understood sammaadi.t.thi and pa~n~naa to be synonyms. Suan and I went > through some passages in the Vibhanga (2nd Abhidhamma text). For example, > here, under 'anupassati' : I do find your agreement very encouraging, still-- > 357. Anupassitiiti. Tatha katamaa anupassanaa? Yaa pa~n~naa > pajaananaa..pe..am oho dhammavicayo sammaadi.t.thi - aya.m vuccati > "anupassanaa".. > > PTS transl: > 357. 'contemplating' means: Therein what is contemplation? That which is > wisdom, understanding, ...absence of dullness, truth investigation, right > view. This is called contemplation.. These all sound like cetasikas to me as opposed to conceptual understanding-- > *** > Of course there are many kinds of pa~n~naa (as referred to in Vism XIV,1) > and degrees too. When it refers to sammaadi.t.thi of the fivefold or > eightfold path, we all agree there is nothing conceptual about it. > > A couple more 'gems' for you which support your comment above nicely: > > From Sammohavinodanii 1008, (translated as 'Dispeller of Delusion, comy to > the Vibhanga, PTS, Classification of the Structure of Conditions): > > "After stating it in many divisions > For profitable, unprofitable and indeterminate states, > Again, however, by the Best of Speakers > The structure of conditions is stated in single manner only > By way of decisive support [condition] > In regard to result of the profitable and unprofitable, > For the purpose of producing the variety > Of knowledge about "which states are condition for which", > And [so] since the variety of knowledge > Regarding that will never come about in those in whom > Is found lacking the Order [of Succession] > Consisting of Competency(pariyatti)-Learning > (savanaa)-Reflection(cintana)-Practice(pa.tipatti) > [Therefore] in accordance with the Order > Consisting of Competency-Learning-Reflection-Practice > The wise act always in regard thereto > For there is nothing other than that which more needs to be done." Well, of course this is all very pleasing, but not for the right reasons probably. I think you and Jon did send me a copy of the Dispeller--I'll have to drag it out next (if for no other reason, to support my Views...). > Of course, we also read in other passages and texts about the importance > of right reflection. For example, in the same text under the > Classification of the Foundations of Mindfulness, we read about the six > things which lead to the abandoning of ill-will: > > "1) the acquiring of the sign of amity, 2) devotion to the development of > amity, 3) reviewing ownership of kamma, 4) *much reflection*, 5) good > friendship, 6) suitable talk." Thanks for all of this Sarah, and my apologies for the long delayed reply. mike 39405 From: robmoult Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 7:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Mike, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "m. nease" wrote: > > Wouldn't a sotaapanna think about wrong view, envy, avarice and doubt > differently from the way a puthujjana would? Or do I misunderstand what you > mean by 'the way they think'? Never mind, I think I see what you mean--so a > learner of any level would, let's say, 'see' the three characteristics in > such as 'beings' just as in PD's? Would that learner be able to experience > insight--satipa.t.thaana vipassanaa--with regard to what the ADS calls > 'concepts'? Would insights founded on what ADS calls concepts eradicate > defilements? > ===== I just posted a message to Andrew that went into a bit more detail on the Mulapariyaya Sutta. It might help clarify a few points. ===== > > I think the 'pattern of thinking' may be my sticking point here. I'm > talking about sabhaava, I guess--and assuming that a learner would think > about sasabhaava dhammas differently from asabhaava dhammas (if such a > distinction can be properly said to exist). Could you explain what you mean > by 'pattern of thinking'? > ===== "Pattern of thinking" is described in a two-step process in my message to Andrew. ===== > Now that I think of it, this has implications for 'the learner', the arahant > and the Buddha, too--in sammuti sacca, the learner, the arahant and the > Buddha exists and thinks; in vohaara sacca, the thinking (vitakka- vicaara?) > exists but not the thinkers. ===== I am confused. Are you saying that in a conventional sense (vohara / sammuti), the Buddha exists and thinks while in the ultimate sense the thinking exists but not the thinkers? If this is what you are saying then I agree with your statement but I don't see the link to this thread. ===== > Do you think this sammuti/vohaara distinction > is an error in the texts? Or do you think its basis is in something other > than pa~n~natti/paramattha dhamma? Do continue, please... ===== Nyanatiloka says that sammuti and vohara mean the same thing. Metta, Rob M :-) 39406 From: m. nease Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 7:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" [Sukin] Hi Howard, ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 2:32 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" [Sukin] >> Dear Sukin, >> My idea is esentially that sammaditthi is "right viewing" rather >> than "correct theory". The "samma" derives from the mode of seeing or >> understanding rather than the character of the object. >> > ========================== > This is a very interesting perspective to me - novel, fresh. > However, > much as I like it, MN 9 seems to indicate that that right view consists of > the > understanding (that's al it says, "understanding") of the following: 1) > the > wholesome and unwholesome, and their roots, 2) nutriment of all sorts, and > its > origin, cessation, and the path leading to that cessation, 3) the 4 noble > truths, and 4) every factor of the dependent origination of suffering, it > origin, > cessation, and the path leading to its cessation. This is about where I've got to with this, too. It seems to me that everything in this list can refer either to Dhamma concepts or to naama and ruupa, so it seems to me not to clearly state whether right view can be conceptual or not--my habitual interpretation is that there may be a correct theoretical view but that Dan's 'right viewing' (which I also think is correct) takes only naama and ruupa as aaramma.na. If I understand your take on all this, concept is always an obstacle to understanding. Do I misunderstand you? Please excuse the long delayed reply. mike 39407 From: m. nease Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 7:08pm Subject: Re: [dsg] More Tales from India: Detachment & Bitter Medicine Very nicely put, Sarah, ----- Original Message ----- From: "sarah abbott" To: Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 1:50 AM Subject: [dsg] More Tales from India: Detachment & Bitter Medicine > So detachment means not minding at all what is conditioned and not wishing > for any particular states to arise. All right! Now I want that detachment! I'd LOVE not to mind at all what is conditioned or to wish for any particular states to arise...how do I start?! Oh yes, moving in slow motion towards the roots of trees and so on...wait! No... 39408 From: Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 2:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Hi, Ken - In a message dated 12/5/04 8:53:20 PM Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@y... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > ------------------- > H: >If you do not > think that the view that there is no practice to be willfully done, > and none that *can* be so done, is not a view of helplessness and > hopelessness, then simply dismiss my perspective as nonsense. That > is certainly your prerogative. > > -------------------- > > Dhamma-practice (satipatthana) does contain the mental factor, > cetana (volition). So does every other moment of consciousness. > But it would be wrong to read into that, the idea of a free will (a > will free from the constraints of conditionality). ---------------------------------------- Howard: I do not believe in a cetana free of conditionality. No phenomena arise randomly. And a free will that is random is a particularly absurd notion, as I see it. --------------------------------------- When I say 'it > > would be wrong' I mean that interpretation of the Tipitaka would > certainly be contrary to the interpretation spelt out in the ancient > commentaries. > > In an age when just about everyone claims to be an interpreter of > the Tipitaka and an authority on Buddhist meditation, the ancient > commentaries are a rare bastion for right view. I shouldn't appoint > myself as "Defender of the Commentaries" but nor should I feel > obliged to hold my tongue. --------------------------------------- Howard: No one here should feel obliged to hold his tongue. I agree. I certainly didn't suggest anything to the contrary in the post to which you are replying. -------------------------------------- > > James has said he would rather I didn't respond to his posts, and I > gather you, too, are tired of my "gainsaying." > --------------------------------------- Howard: If I should feel that way, please be assured that I will say so. I have not said so, and I do not say so. ------------------------------------ But, in the eyes of > > some readers, silence does give consent. ------------------------------------ Howard: It is often so that silence signifies assent, and it therefore makes good sense to speak up when the matter is deemed important. My perspective is still the same as before. Yours is different. That's fine. ------------------------------------ In a group portraying > > itself as "Tipitaka and Commentaries based" the inference that the > commentaries peddle hopelessness, helplessness and wrong view will > not go unnoticed. So, again, for the record, I disagree. :-) ------------------------------------- Howard: Duly noted and understood. That's perfectly fine. You disagree, and you say so. No problem with that as far as I'm concerned. ------------------------------------------ > > Kind regards, > Ken H > > > ======================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39409 From: m. nease Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 7:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Rob, ----- Original Message ----- From: "robmoult" To: Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 7:05 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts > I am confused. Are you saying that in a conventional sense (vohara / > sammuti), the Buddha exists and thinks while in the ultimate sense > the thinking exists but not the thinkers? If this is what you are > saying then I agree with your statement but I don't see the link to > this thread. Yes, but never mind... >> Do you think this sammuti-vohaara distinction >> is an error in the texts? Or do you think its basis is in > something other >> than pa~n~natti/paramattha dhamma? Do continue, please... > > ===== > > Nyanatiloka says that sammuti and vohara mean the same thing. Thanks for the correction--of course I meant 'sammuti-vohaara/paramattha' (convention-usage/ultimate). mike 39410 From: Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 2:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" [Sukin] Hi, Mike - In a message dated 12/5/04 10:08:20 PM Eastern Standard Time, mlnease@z... writes: > If I understand your > take on all this, concept is always an obstacle to understanding. Do I > misunderstand you? > > ========================= I see concept as a kind of two-edged sword. It cuts both ways. On the one hand, concept reveals, on the other hand it obscures. Without concept but also still unpossesive of genuine pa~n~na, we would be, as William James has said, little more than a sessile sea anemone. On the other hand, the means of knowing provided by concept is inherently distorted compared to the direct knowing of wisdom, and concepts are the primary carriers of ignorance. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39411 From: robmoult Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 7:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Mike, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "m. nease" wrote: > >> Do you think this sammuti-vohaara distinction > >> is an error in the texts? Or do you think its basis is in > > something other > >> than pa~n~natti/paramattha dhamma? Do continue, please... > > > > ===== > > > > Nyanatiloka says that sammuti and vohara mean the same thing. > > Thanks for the correction--of course I meant 'sammuti- vohaara/paramattha' > (convention-usage/ultimate). > I have been continuing my search of primary texts. Nyanatiloka says that the term "paramattha" is first used in the opening paragraph of the Kathavatthu (Points of Controversy). I checked my copy of the Kathavatthu and found that the term paramattha is used twice and both times it is used in the context of "is a being an ultimate reality?" (not to keep you in suspence, the answer is No! :-) ). The more generic use of the term paramattha to refer to the ultimate reality of dhammas is not in the primary texts (though it is the starting point for the struture of the Abhidhammattha Sangaha). In other words, the assigning of "ultimate reality" status to constituent dhammas is not found in the primary texts. Metta, Rob M :-) 39412 From: plnao Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 7:35pm Subject: I tried it and liked it! (was Re: Bhante and Smiling ) Hello Bhante > The reason that I have my students smile is to help them have a more > uplifted mind. With this lighter type of mind, joy has a better chance to > arise. With joy in one's mind one's awareness sees much more clearly when > the joy disappears and a heavier type of mental state arises > (unwholesome). Smiling very much helps my students to recognize what is > happening in the present moment. You have been very patient in your insistence on this practice, so I tried it this morning. It was very pleasant. I generated the smile, if you will, by thinking of the Buddha and his teaching of the Noble Truths. Thinking of the Buddha with a smile did make me feel like I had a more uplifted mind, that is true. And yes, I would say that I *did* have a more uplifted mind when thinking of the Buddha, and smiling. I had a physically warm feeling, even. (Quite chilly in our place.) When I started to nod off ( my main hindrane when meditating) and brought myself back to the breath, I also brought back the smile, and the pleasant feeling, and the warmth. > As Ken O says, "We live our life with patience, courage and faith even > though the eradication of underlying tendencies can be a very gigantic > challenge." Smiling is a way to help the meditator overcome the > underlying tendencies for unwholesome states to arise and this is what > 'right effort' is all about. First, recognizing that an unwholesome state > has arisen (i.e. the smile has disappeared), next to let go of that > unwholesome state and relax the tension caused by that state, next to > bring up a wholesome state (smile again), and then to keep that wholesome > state going. This is where we will disagree, again. The pleasantness I was feeling was not necessary a wholesome state. I just don't believe that the Buddha wanted to teach us how to have pleasant feelings. Liberation comes through seeing with insight into all our mental states, both the wholesome ones and the unwholesome ones. So if I "recongize that an unwholesome state has arisen", that recognizing is in itself a wholesome state. It is a small step towards detachment from the unwholesome state. When I regenerated the smile and the pleasant feeling, it was - in my opinion at this time- a lunge away from insight towards comfort. And I was aware of this, so it was OK. Life is hard, I know. I don't want to always be frowning on practices that make it easier to deal with life's hardships. So I will try this practice again. Just trying it once is not enough. I shouldn't even comment yet. But I thought you would like to know that I tried it, as you recommended. > This takes real practice to develop and putting a sincere smile on one's > face helps one to be able to recognize their mental states when they > change. Yes, I can see that this could be true. It did for me, but in my case I felt that putting the smile back did not indicate a wholesome mental state but rather an unwholesome one, an attachment to pleasant feeling. I appreciate the way you mention chanda, but from what I understanda chanda can have either a kusala or akusala object. (ss compared to viramsa(sp?) which is the investigation of realities/panna factor and can have only a kusala object - I may be wrong here.) >It is following the 8 Fold Path, because it changes one's > perspective and helps the meditator's mindfulness to become sharper. I can see this. I'm thinking these days that I will be returning to the meditation cushion one day soon for another go at insight meditation. My daily life is already a kind of meditation. Time on the cushion could be an intensification of that. We'll see. I'm a beginner, so I should keep an open mind on these things. >Joy and smiling lead to a much finer type of awareness and mindfulness, these > states help greatly to be able to watch minds tricky meanderings, so when > the recognition of this wandering arises it can be let go of more quickly > and more easily. The pleasant feeling I had from intentionally smiling and thinking of the Buddha was something, for sure, but I'm not sure it was joy. For me, joy arises at unexpected moments in a flooding way, but I have only begun to figure this out. > This is another thing that Ken O said it a previous post. It is taken > from the Visuddhi Magga: Gladness is characterized as gladdening > (produced by others' success). Its function resides in being unenvious. > It is manifested as the elimination of aversion (boredom). Its proximate > cause is seeing beings' success. It succeeds when it makes aversion > (boredom) subside, and it fails when it produces 'merriment'. > > Doesn't merriment imply smiling? To me it does! Yes, I did feel more merry while I was smiling, I'll admit that. By the way, you made a reference in another post about misquoting Vis. I didn't get what you were apologizing about, but please never mind. > Eventually, one can develop the habit of smiling and it will become an > automatic thing. But it does take practice to make perfect (if there is > such a thing as perfect). Intentional putting a smile on one's face > eventually leads to a keener awareness of the present moment. Try it > you'll like it! I did like it! And I will try it again. Metta, Phil 39413 From: m. nease Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 7:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" [Sukin] Hi Howard, ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 7:24 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" [Sukin] > I see concept as a kind of two-edged sword. It cuts both ways. On > the > one hand, concept reveals, on the other hand it obscures. That's the way I see it too, I think... > Without concept but > also still unpossesive of genuine pa~n~na, we would be, as William James > has > said, little more than a sessile sea anemone. It's been at least thirty years since I read WJ, but I think I do take his point... > On the other hand, the means of > knowing provided by concept is inherently distorted compared to the direct > knowing of wisdom, '...inherently distorted...'--so, always moha? > and concepts are the primary carriers of ignorance. I'm not sure what you mean by 'carrier' (I'd like to know), but can you direct me to a Paali text that posits concept as, say, proximate cause (or anything similar) of moha? Sorry if you've done this already Thanks for your patience! mike 39414 From: m. nease Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 7:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Rob, ----- Original Message ----- From: "robmoult" To: Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 7:28 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts >> > Nyanatiloka says that sammuti and vohara mean the same thing. >> >> Thanks for the correction--of course I meant 'sammuti- > vohaara/paramattha' >> (convention-usage/ultimate). > > I have been continuing my search of primary texts. Nyanatiloka says > that the term "paramattha" is first used in the opening paragraph of > the Kathavatthu (Points of Controversy). Well, at least we're not initiating new ones... > I checked my copy of the > Kathavatthu and found that the term paramattha is used twice and > both times it is used in the context of "is a being an ultimate > reality?" (not to keep you in suspence, the answer is No! :-) ). What a relief...but cold comfort if there's really no difference after all... > The more generic use of the term paramattha to refer to the ultimate > reality of dhammas is not in the primary texts (though it is the > starting point for the struture of the Abhidhammattha Sangaha). > > In other words, the assigning of "ultimate reality" status to > constituent dhammas is not found in the primary texts. Thanks again, Rob, very interesting points even to a dilletante like myself--I look forward to seeing (and trying to understand) where this all leads. mike 39415 From: plnao Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 7:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] I tried it and liked it! (was Re: Bhante and Smiling ) Hello again, Bhante Vimilaramsi > I did like it! And I will try it again. I forgot to thank you for having recommended this practice. Metta, Phil 39416 From: Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 3:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" [Sukin] Hi, Mike - In a message dated 12/5/04 10:53:34 PM Eastern Standard Time, mlnease@z... writes: > >and concepts are the primary carriers of ignorance. > > I'm not sure what you mean by 'carrier' (I'd like to know), but can you > direct me to a Paali text that posits concept as, say, proximate cause (or > anything similar) of moha? Sorry if you've done this already > > ======================= All elements of all khandhas in non-arahants are infected by avijja. Avijja is passed on, link by link, in the cycle of dependent origination. Concepts, formed by sankharic formation, are among the elements that are infected, and they play major role in the transmission of avijja for human beings in particular. In any case, by being a carrier of avijja, I mean being infected by it and passing it on. I'm very poor at citations, Mike. I do know there is a sutta - I always forget the reference - in whcih the Buddha says something to the effect that he uses concepts but is not fooled by them. I take that as pointing to the delusive aspect of concepts. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39417 From: Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 3:19pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" [Sukin] Hi again, Mike - In a message dated 12/5/04 11:14:55 PM Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: > All elements of all khandhas in non-arahants are infected by avijja > ====================== That is an overstatement. The links in D.O. are all so infected. But rupas are not. Sights, sounds, tastes, etc are, in themselves, innocent. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39418 From: plnao Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 8:26pm Subject: Chanda ( was Re: [dsg] I tried it and liked it! (was Re: Bhante and Smiling ) Hello yet again, Bhante Vimililaramsi, and all > Yes, I can see that this could be true. It did for me, but in my case I felt > that putting the smile back did not indicate a wholesome mental state but > rather an unwholesome one, an attachment to pleasant feeling. I appreciate > the way you mention chanda, but from what I understanda chanda can > have either a kusala or akusala object. (ss compared to viramsa(sp?) which > is the investigation of realities/panna factor and can have only a kusala > object - I may > be wrong here.) Here's a clarification of this, from Nina's "Conditions": "Chanda, viriya and citta can be predominant in the accomplishment of an enterprise or task both in a wholesome way and in an unwholesome way, whereas vimamsa, investigation of Dhamma, which is a sobhana ctasika, can only be predominant in a wholesome way." There follows a bit later an interesting example: "Viriya can be a predominant factor in the accomplishment of our tasks. Preparing food may be part of our daily chores, and sometimes, when we like to do this, chanda may be predominant. At other times, we may find it an effort but we may still want to cook. Then we may prepare food with viriya as predominant factor. At such moments, there is likely to be lobha, but viriya is foremost in the accomplishment of cooking." At this very moment, I am boiling pasta, which will be drenched in cheese for a quick, unhealthy lunch that will satisfy my taste buds. I don't know if there is chanda involved, but there is certainly lobha. Metta, Phil 39419 From: Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 8:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Rob, The concept of concept came from the abhidhamma pitaka and there is a little discussion of it in Vism. and more in the main commentary to Vism. So I don't think we can blame or credit Acarya Anuruddha for starting this controversy. For a slightly tangential comment from a modern scholar regarding the meaning of "sa~n~naa" in the nikayas, Tilman Vetter writes, "Sa~n~naa is, at the most, perception in the sense of a specific idea stimulated by, but not necessarily correctly interpreting the object of sensory perception. Often it is mere imagination, a few times contemplation." Further on he writes, "in all cases sa~n~naa seems to be a mental phenomenon that eventually has to be overcome or no longer identified with"..."I have found no place where spiritual insight (pa~n~na and synonyms) are considered to be renounced as one has to renounce the five items [khandhas]."* L: So if you think sa~n~naa has something to do with concept you could look at its use in the suttas. Similarly sankhara khandha. Also I think the word "reality" is a little harsh. Instead of "concept and reality" we might think of this duo as impermanence and illusion. Both are to be degrasped. Sometimes teachers build up reality as an easy way to devalue concept but this can lead to a misleading valuation of reality as something superior. Inferiority and superiority will only be found in how we view these dhammas, not in the dhammas themselves, imo. Larry *Tilmann Vetter "The 'Khandha Passages' in the Vinayapitaka and the four main Nikayas" 2000 39420 From: buddhatrue Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 8:48pm Subject: Re: The Rose [James] Friend Howard, > Yes, there is a rose, but with an existence even more tenuous and > ungraspable than the color, hardness, cohesion etc that interrelatedly underlie it > and the mind that strains to see it as a unity. The rose is empty of own > being and is never directly encountered. Yet it is not nothing. > A host of past and presently observed phenomena underlie what we name > "rose". Our mind imputes upon that aggregate of passing bubbles the name > 'rose' and treats it as a self-existent entity. The rose exists, and yet ... how > exactly it exists is important to see. In one sense, it exists as the universal > flux proclaiming "See me here and now in this form that joins mind to fellow > flashings in the void. Now you see me, now you don't. Catch me if you can!" > > With metta, > Howard > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble > in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a > phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) Yes, I completely agree, and nicely put. Reminds me of your sign off quote (so I decided not to snip it off this time ;-). Metta, James 39421 From: buddhatrue Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 9:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Friend Ken H., --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: James has said he would rather I didn't respond to his posts, Kind regards, > Ken H I NEVER said that!! That would be a terrible thing to say (who am I to dictate who can and cannot respond to my posts??). I may not like your responses (or I may), and I may not respond in kind, but I don't think I have ever put a 'gag order' on anyone. Metta, James 39422 From: Ken O Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 9:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Metta through the Noble Truths Hi Phil P: This got me thinking - again- that if and when we have insight into the Noble Truths, doesn't metta arise naturally? How can we have a friendly "we're in the same boat" feeling when we see the way people (including ourselves) are hurried through life by craving > for being, cravings for sensual pleasure, how we are all swung this way and that by the worldly concerns. K: Beautiful. That is how compassion arise, seeing the suffering of people. k: On the note on smiling when you try it, as I said before, smiling can be conditioned by lobha mula cittas which can have pleasant feelings. So the pleasant feelings you have can be an akusala citta that arise. K: Hope you dont mind me being direct. Recollecting on Buddha and smiling are two different things. Recollection is a method but it does not ask you to smile. Joyous feeling after recollecting the Buddha is different from one that condition by a smile, because one is not overcome by passion while the other can be overcome by passion. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an11-013.html <> Ken O 39423 From: buddhatrue Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 10:11pm Subject: Re: kusala and akusala. Friend Nina, Nina: It is not a question of accepting them, but: understanding them as impersonal, conditioned elements. This is the Middle Way. James: I agree. Nina: Dhamma is like a mirror. James: I like this phrase, very poetic, but I'm not sure what you mean. Nina: As you also know from your contacts with others when you were helping meditation groups in the U.S. at the Thai temple, people worry about their akusala, want to ignore it. Try to suppress it with an idea of self and this is not the solution. James: I don't recall writing anything like this in regards to my experiences as a meditation teacher's assistant. Participants didn't tell me that they were worried about their akusala, nor did I witness participants ignoring their defilements or trying to suppress them with an idea of self. We spoke often about the hindrances to meditation and how to overcome them; is that what you mean? Nina: At the same time Kh.S. helps us all not to take kusala nor akusala for self and to learn to detect our clinging to self. James: What is this `self' that you often refer to? Do you mean desire and craving for existence? You seem to speak about `self' as if a `self' really exists. My understanding is that no `self' exists, only the desire for existence. Nina: The sotapanna (first stage of enlightenment) has eradicated the wrong view of self and his/her kusala is so much purer. James: I like how you point out the possible gradations in kusala. Some people's kusala is going to be `purer' than other people's. Often times we forget this when we think in theoretical terms. Nina: James, do you see: Right view is wholesomeness. James: Yes. That's an easy one, give me a harder question. ;-)) Nina: It is an exhortation to develop pañña. James: I have no issues with the importance of developing panna (wisdom). It is very crucial. However, the issue I have is when the development of panna supersedes or replaces the development of sila and samadhi. Sila, Samadhi, and Panna should all be developed to the greatest extent possible, this is the Noble Eightfold Path. Nina: You will see that Kh stresses what is also in the suttas: seeing and the defilements arising on account of visible object. We keep on seeing persons or things in the visible object. Or we cling to my seeing. We fail to consider them as impersonal elements and this gives rise to a great deal of akusala. James: Yes, you point to something here that I want to address: Why does A. Sujin seem to place so much importance on `seeing'? Why not place equal importance on the other sense doors, as the Buddha does? From my understanding, seeing is the most neutral of the five senses. The other senses (taste, smell, hearing, and touch) bring up the strongest reactions of like and dislike and thus craving. Why not often close your eyes and focus on where most of the problem lies? Metta, James 39424 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 10:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" > > My point is that the Buddha's teaching was not focused on realities > > and non-realities (concepts). Acariya Anuruddha used ultimate > > realities as a structure to summarize the Abhidhamma when he wrote > > the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, but ultimate realities are not an > > element of the Buddha's teaching. A cursory reading of the > > Abhidhammattha Sangaha gives the incorrect impression that > > ontological issues (realities vs. non-realities) is an important > > part of the Buddha's teaching. > > ========== Dear RobM, I think seeing what is reality (dhamma) and what is not is stressed throught the teachings. The Udanaatthakatha (trans. masefield p.878)Blind from birth chapter:"since they do not know Dhamma, they do not know that which is not Dhamma either. ....... they neither know dhamma to be a thing having an owm nature (sabhava), nor do they know that which is not dhamma to be a thing lacking an own nature.(Dhammam sabhavadhammam..adhammam asabhavadhammam) And as such they declare a thing having an own nature as though it were a thing lacking an own nature....""endquote This passage was written hundreds of years before Anuruddha was born. Robert 39425 From: Ken O Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 11:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Rob M > From SNXXII.94, it is clear that the Buddha said that the five > aggregates do exist (Bhikkhu Bodhi's commentary explains that they > exist as impermanent processes). As far as I know, this is the only > time that the Buddha made an ontological statement regarding > existence / non-existence. According to Bhikkhu Bodhi's commentary, > the Buddha made this statement to refute a specific type of wrong > view (illusionist theories that the world lacks existence). k: So does that contradict what Buddha say that D.O exist and 4NT. In one sutta Buddha says D.O exist. The fundamental question should be is self (a concept) a reality. Self does not exist but the attachment to a view to self exist, is a reality. Buddha say there is no self in aggregates, so do self exist then? > In SNXXII.94 the Buddha did say that the five aggregates are real > (in an ontological sense) to refute a specific wrong view. I am not aware of any Sutta where the Buddha said that concepts are "not real". If you are aware of any other ontological statements proclaimed by the Buddha, please advise. k: We must first differentiat that does concepts exist - yes only in the mental construct, but do it has reality - No. Other than exist as a imaginary construct, they do not exist as a reality that can be directly known Lets look at Mulapariyaya Sutta which you quoted earlier, Worldings -- <> Arahants -- <> There is no reference that concepts exist as reality, why, please note that <>. Ken O 39426 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Dec 5, 2004 11:55pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 67 - Perception/Sa~n~naa (n) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.3 Perception(sa~n~naa)contd] ***** When all defilements have been eradicated there will be no more conditions for rebirth, no more conditions for being obsessed by objects. Saññå is conditioned by the citta and the other cetasikas it accompanies and thus saññå is different as it accompanies different types of citta. When we listen to the Dhamma and we remember the Dhamma we have heard there is kusala saññå with the kusala citta. Remembering what one has heard and reflecting about it again and again are important conditions for the arising of sati which is mindful of what appears now. The saññå which accompanies mindfulness of the present moment is different from the saññå accompanying the citta which thinks of realities. ***** [Ch.3 Perception(sa~n~naa)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 39427 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 0:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Metta for oneself translation question Dear Antony, Thank you for your kind comments. --- Antony Woods wrote: > The translation you quoted was more like “one who loves himself > //should// > not harm another” which really helps. This makes a huge difference. I > think > the Buddha meant just that we should not harm others. He wasn’t saying > to > cultivate concern for oneself in order to love others. .... S: Exactly. We have no shortage of concern for ourselves. ..... > > Undue concern for oneself can be translated as “worry” which is easier > to > see as attachment and a hindrance. “Self-obsession” could also apply. > A friend of mine says affectionately “Now quit that worrying, silly > boy!” .... S: We can test out that at moments of true metta or kindness, generosity or understanding of dhammas,there is no concern for oneself at these times, no worry about 'me' and my situation, no attachment or self-obsession at all. When there is wanting anything for oneself, including metta, more wisdom, quicker results, fewer unwholesome states or a change of personality -- it's self-obsession again, as you put it. Developing such self-obsession merely results in the opposite of what we were wishing for in the first place - a life of unease rather than of ease! I've enjoyed our discussion on this topic, Antony. Do you have another one to follow with? > May you be well and happy, ... S: you too. Metta, Sarah ======= 39428 From: kenhowardau Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 0:45am Subject: Re: Evil thoughts (Rob M) Hi Rob M, Thanks for your reply. We were talking about puppy training and the capacity (or incapacity) of formal practices to develop kusala habits. ------------- RM: > I just noticed a post of Nina's (39191) in which she replied to Larry's request for an example of a habit: Since we are back from India Lodewijk has formed a new habit: reading a sutta at night, and I: reading a sutta with the breakfast coffee. (Phil will like this.) We can form new habits, break old ones, form good and bad habits. Habit: what we usually do, or think. What is often done becomes a habit. What is it? Citta and cetasika, kusala or akusala. It is the action of accumulating, during the period of javana cittas. Accumulation is a difficult word. As I said it also denotes what lies dormant, and these can be: good and bad dispositions. I think that Nina and I are saying the same thing... that repeated actions will tend to repeat again. This is their nature. > --------------- Nina and Lodewijk would be the last to believe in the efficacy of pannatti-sila. When they are reading suttas in the evening and morning, it is because that is what they like to do. They do not presume to be having sila. They do not have the wrong view of 'control over dhammas.' And they do not see their habits as necessarily Dhamma practice. When panna arises to see truth in the suttas, then there is pariyatti - the intellectual stage of Dhamma practice. When panna arises to see a paramattha dhamma the way the Buddha described it, then there is patipatti - actual Dhamma practice. These things are dependent on conditions (including kusala habits), not on calculated behaviours (formal practices). --------------- RM: > One moment, I may be thinking of a self who is meditating. The next moment, I am thinking of a person with true metta. As you know, one cannot have attachment to self-view and thoughts of true metta at the same time. Will those thoughts of self-view tend to create further accumulations, a deeper habit? Yup, they will. Will those thoughts of true metta also tend to create further accumulations, a deeper habit? Yup again! > -------------- Fair enough - except for one thing: Metta arises in one who knows the difference between kindness - kusala - and attachment - akusala. Metta for others is not 'desire to have metta.' If you are a kind person, why are sitting alone on a pillow trying to have metta? Why aren't you out being kind to people? (just joking) --------------- RM: > This is where right effort of the Eightfold Noble Path comes in. Right effort is making an effort to: - Reduce akusala - Eliminate akusala - Make kusala grow - Maintain kusala > --------------- Is it? When there is right effort of the 8NP, all four forms arise at once, which is quite a feat (a supramundane effort). At mundane moments of kusala (including, I think, satipatthana) there is only one form of effort at a time. (Although it might be argued that, in satipatthana, all four kusala forms are being developed.) But I am arguing that formal practice never involves right effort. ---------- RM: > Is this not just a more technical way of saying what Nina said, "We can form new habits, break old ones, form good and bad habits." > ---------- I think "not" was a typo. In any case, Nina tells us that habits are just habits. Repeated kusala will form a habit of kusala, and repeated akusala will form a habit of akusala. Unfortunately for the meditators, there is no control: the condition that allows for kusala consciousness is understanding, not rite or ritual. -------------- RM: > The key point here is that weight of the kamma depends on the strength of the volition at the moment. 99.999% of the time, I have akusala thoughts (clinging to sense data, clinging to existence, attachment to self view, etc.) but the kamma created is very weak because the volition is very weak. In that moment of pure metta, the volition is incredibly strong because I am "going against the natural flow". This incredibly strong volition associated with the kusala action creates incredibly powerful good kamma. ----------------- I won't argue, except to say that I doubt very much if you ever have metta while you are sitting on your pillow. Sitting doesn't become a factor for metta until it is being developed as a jhana absorption (as discussed below). If sitting takes place as a ritualistic practice, only wrong view and lobha are being developed, not metta. ---------------- RM: > Let me pose you a question. I think that we both know that jhanas do not lead to enlightenment. Prior to the Buddha, others (such as Udaka, Gotama's final teacher) reached the highest levels of jhana yet were unable to get enlightened. Since this is true, why did the Buddha not dismiss the jhanas? > -------------------- Before the Tathagata arose in the world, the highest form of wisdom was (I think) jhana absorption. There were many wise men and women who could otherwise have practised vipassana but who could only aspire to jhana. (Not all wise people did, of course, some chose to live as householders.) When a Tathagata finally arose in the world, some jhana practitioners, not all, were so wise they could practise mundane vipassana in the very first lifetime in which they heard the Dhamma. A smaller number were wise enough to attain Stream-entry (and so on). A tiny minority became chief arahant-disciples, able to teach other ariyans - in other words; the greater their wisdom, the greater the strength of their attainments. If a monk had the potential to attain high levels of supramundane powers, the Buddha would encourage him to persist with his jhana development. (I *think* that's the correct explanation.) ------------------------ RM: > Why did the Buddha put so much emphasis on the jhanas (i.e. right concentration in the Noble Eightfold Path)? Could it be because jhanas (i.e. "formal meditation") ---------------------- :-O Ark! You made me choke on my breakfast cereal! Jhana is not formal meditation! :-) Jhana is developed in one who is already "established in sila" and "established in moderation." Then, "having temporarily suppressed the hindrances, ardent, clearly comprehending and mindful," he sets out on the homeless life (at the base of a tree etc.). There, sitting straight-backed and intent on nothing else, he concentrates his tremendously kusala consciousness and maintains that concentration (as an absorption). * Formal practice, in stark contrast, is the idea that kusala consciousness can be developed by sitting in a certain way, or by concentrating, or by trying not to think etc. In other words, it is wrong view. -------------------- RM:[jhanas] > are important preparatory work that helps the mind get ready for enlightenment? > ------------ I'm not sure about that. (I'm still getting over the shock.) If a person has the accumulated panna to develop vipassana, I think it would be easier to do that to the exclusion of jhana. If he is really, really smart (and is confident of being reborn in a conducive environment) perhaps he should go ahead and develop jhana first. But I doubt there is any such person in the world today - they all went to parinibbana years ago (yonks ago). :-) Ken H * I'm not sure of my sources, but I mentioned this to Christine on the weekend, and I think she said she would look it up for me. (Hi Christine.) :-) 39429 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 0:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Value of discussion (was evil thoughts) Dear Bhante, --- Bhante Vimalaramsi wrote: > > Dhamma Greetings Sarah, > > By reading so much about lobha when trying to pull up wholesome states > of > mind is a mistake. .... S: With respect, I think the mistake is in 'trying to pull up wholesome states' and assuming that a particular scenario, in this kind the smile, is indicative of wholesome states, as Ken O and Phil have been stressing. On our recent trip, a friend asked about 'tears' and whether they only accompanied unwholesome states. The reply was that when we think like this -- of some particular situation such as the smiling or the tearful one -- there is no understanding of presently appearing dhammas and in effect, we're trying to 'work out' the various kinds of consciousness in a situation, taking such a situation for being a reality. Whenever there is wanting something, whether it is to having wholesome states, to knowing more about the Tipitaka, to doing good things, there's bound to be lobha (attachment, wanting something for oneself and expectations again. When there's lobha, there's no panna (understanding) and it's hard to see because it's not what we wish to see. .... >Chanda is a wholesome form of desire and gets > forgotten about. If one is pulling up a smile this leads to an uplifted > mind and doesn't have anything to do with the unwholesome lobha. .... S: I think that it's the unwholesome lobha that tends to get mistaken for chanda or other wholesome states, rather than the reverse. Chanda may also accompany these unwholesome cittas and masquerade as wholesome chanda. Again, only panna can know at any moment - the cittas change so fast, that we can't say in such and such a situation it's this or that way. That's why detachment is so important in order to understand the different kusala and akusala states for what they are, as anatta, rather than trying to have them a certain way with attachment again. This is how we can read more and more about attachment, about the accumulations or tendencies, developing detachment from whatever has arisen and beginning to see these dhammas for what they are as anatta. Otherwise, I believe we'll always be blinded to the real extent of attachment arising even whilst performing such seemingly noble deeds. .... >Chanda > is pointing one's mind to the direction of liberation, so it is a > wholesome direction even if one has desire in their mind because of the > direction one intends to attain. .... S: It always comes back to the present moment. If there is desire now -- for results, for jhana, for doing good deeds or whatever, it will merely lead to more desire and take us away from the direction of the development of the Path and it won't be wholesome chanda arising. You may wish to read more about chanda in Nina's 'Cetasikas', in 'U.P.' and also 'cheating dhammas' in U.P. Metta, Sarah p.s I hope you received my other post on panna. I appreciate your contributions and accounts of your kind deeds too. ======= 39430 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 1:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: AN III - 100 mental misconduct vs. thoughts of ill-will Friend James, Yes, it's a long time since we've chatted, but that doesn't mean I haven't been following your posts with interest. --- buddhatrue wrote: > I am just jumping into this thread and I haven't followed the entire > thread, but I have a question: Is this how the Buddha said one > should view the defilements? .... S: Let me ask you. If a defilement, lets say attachment, has arisen, do you think the Buddha encouraged us to be aware of it at such a time with awareness, detachment and understanding, or was something else recommended? If it has already arisen by conditions, isn't it 'good to know the truth of one's accumulations' as I wrote. .... >This seems to be a type of "if it > feels good, do it" philosophy. ... S: I think it's more a "if it's arisen anyway, why not know it for what it is, rather than having attachment, aversion or ignorance at such a time". ... >I'm not saying that hating one's > defilements is productive (I don't think it is), but I also don't > think that one should accept them. What do you think? ... S: I think the most helpful and important thing is to understand any defilements or other dhammas as conditioned and not self. This is the knowledge that leads to detachment, acceptance and the gradual elimination of all defilements. As I just wrote to Bhante V, wanting to have fewer defilements or more good and taking these for being my good and bad mental states, merely leads to more attachment to the self. Thanks for your comments and interest in this thread. Did you listen to any of the audio discussion from India?. The notes that you responded to were from an earlier India discussion in which Kom and Nina were helpfully raising the points. Metta, Sarah p.s You've written a couple of posts I've particularly appreciated. One was on the sutta about Sariputta to Bhante. Also, a couple of good quotes on rt speech sometime. ============================================= 39431 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 1:30am Subject: Trying to catch up with Ken O and breathless;-) Hi Ken O, I know that somewhere I have a couple of posts to reply to you on - I will come across them sometime. One was on anapanasati. Yes, I know you collated Nina's posts on the sutta and commentary and you'd be most welcome to repost in small segments (like I do Cetasikas perhaps), adding your other quotes and comments at the same time. I'd be glad. It might be helpful to put your cleaned up piece of Nina's series in 'files' for easy access while you do this. Also see the other posts on anapanasati (mostly Jon's) in UP too. You might like to include some of these in your series. Anyway, whatever you like;-). On the qu about your serious approach to dhamma as I'll remember from a breakfast in Bangkok;-);-). Funny, when Howard gave you a little friendly advice, it reminded me so much of Vince's kindly but strong advice too;-);-). For my part, I just appreciate your very keen interest in the Dhamma and I'm used to your style;-). I know that it may seem to newcomers like Hugo that you don't consider all sides and aspects and so on, but I see the complete opposite -- you consider very deeply indeed. When you first joined DSG you had come from a strong Mahayana and Pure Land tradition as I recall and really, really questioned and challenged what we were saying here a lot. Not a stone or a word was left without a lot of consideration and careful checking. We'd sometimes get 50 qus in a post I think. You've been providing some great quotes and comments too (even if the words get a bit jumbled sometimes in your haste -- happens to me also;-) and you show a lot of kindness and compassion in sharing what you find so helpful. Metta, Sarah p.s. if I don't get back on any other threads we have, pls remind me. ==================================== 39432 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 2:34am Subject: Re: AN III - 100 mental misconduct vs. thoughts of ill-will Friend Sarah, Hi there!! Gosh, long time no chat. Well, lucky for me I took the day off from work. I really like your post because it is very direct: Sarah: Let me ask you. If a defilement, lets say attachment, has arisen, do you think the Buddha encouraged us to be aware of it at such a time with awareness, detachment and understanding, or was something else recommended? James: To be aware of one's attachment with detachment? That would be quite a trick! ;-)) Seriously, I know what you are getting at but it seems that you are forgetting the defilement of delusion. We are all suffering from delusion so it isn't always possible to be really aware of one's defilements. We take the beautiful for ugly, the ugly for beautiful, the impermanent for permanent,…etc. Not only that, in a worldling the defilement of attachment is arising almost constantly! When is there ever really a moment without attachment? As far as what the Buddha taught, he taught that one should purify the mind by following the Noble Eightfold Path; this would include cultivating sila, samadhi, and panna. Sarah: If it has already arisen by conditions, isn't it 'good to know the truth of one's accumulations' as I wrote. James: Again, I don't think it is possible to know the truth of one's accumulations. We are all suffering from delusion (ignorance). Sarah: I think it's more a "if it's arisen anyway, why not know it for what it is, rather than having attachment, aversion or ignorance at such a time". James: If we knew what `it' (defilements) is really, then we wouldn't have attachment, aversion, or ignorance. See what I am getting at? Sarah: I think the most helpful and important thing is to understand any defilements or other dhammas as conditioned and not self. James: This is like saying, "What would be really helpful for the blind is if they would just see." Sarah: As I just wrote to Bhante V, wanting to have fewer defilements or more good and taking these for being my good and bad mental states, merely leads to more attachment to the self. James: No, it leads to a greater purification of the mind. Don't do evil, do only good, and purify the mind, this is the teaching of all Buddhas. And what is this "more attachment to the self" mean really? I asked Nina this also, what is this `self' that you are saying we are attached to? I don't know any `self'. I can be attached to food, money, sex, etc., these things exist, but what is this `self' you keep speaking of? Do you mean the craving for being? Sarah: Did you listen to any of the audio discussion from India?. James: No, I have a slow connection so I didn't attempt to download them. But I think it is a good idea that you have them available! Sarah: You've written a couple of posts I've particularly appreciated. One was on the sutta about Sariputta to Bhante. Also, a couple of good quotes on rt speech sometime. James: Thanks. Glad to know you're keeping an eye on me. Somebody has to! ;-)) Metta, James 39433 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 3:46am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 154 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, So far we have discussed molecular level of dhamma of 40 lokuttara cittas or supramundane consciousness, 27 mahaggata cittas or greater consciousness, 24 kama sobhana cittas or sensuous beautiful consciousness. They are 40 + 27 + 24 = 91 sobha cittas or 91 beautiful consciousness of 121 total cittas. There are 30 asobha cittas or 30 non-beautiful consciousness. 91 and 30 makes 121 total cittas. 30 asobhana cittas or non-beautiful consciousness are 12 akusala cittas or 12 unwholesome consciousness and 18 ahetuka cittas or 18 root-less consciousness. 12 akusala cittas are non-beautiful and asobhana, no doubt. We have discussed 12 akusala cittas at molecular level. 18 ahetuka cittas or root-less consciousness are also non-beautiful and called asobhana cittas. Because all these 18 cittas do not have any of beautiful mental factors or sobhana cetasikas, most importantly they all do not have any of beautiful root dhammas namely alobha, adosa and amoha cetasika. 18 ahetuka cittas are 2 kinds. They are vipaka cittas/ resultant consciousness or they are kiriya cittas/ functional consciousness/ inoperational consciousness. There are 15 ahetuka vipaka cittas and 3 ahetuka kiriya cittas. There are 3 ahetuka kiriya cittas. They are root-less functional consciousness or rootless inoperational consciousness. They are called functional or inoperational because they do not produce any kamma because of their arising. They do not create any kamma because of their arising. So all 3 ahetuka kiriya cittas are inoperational or functional. They are rootless. So they all do not have any of lobha, dosa, moha, alobha, adosa, and amoha which are all root cetasikas. These are root dhammas because they supply the necessaries to trees which are the dhamma molecules and compound such as citta-cetasikas molecules and citta-cetasika-cittajarupa compounds. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39434 From: jwromeijn Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 4:07am Subject: Re: Concept and Reality in Primary Texts --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: ... Dear Rob, Rob: I do not know enough Buddhist history to make a statement. What is important to me is that the two-truth model as you call it is not central to the primary texts. Which group originated the idea and who might of copied it from whom is of some intellectual interest, but not a key issue for me. Joop: I don't like the discussion-trick to call something you don't like (only) of intellectual interest. Which group originated the idea of the two truths (conceptual and ultimate) is as such not of interest. I have two reactions on it: (1) for understanding an idea (for example that of the two truths), we have to understand the history of that idea, and the discuusions between groups about that idea. Not only the monks composing the Abhidhamma or Buddhaghosa or Acariya Anuruddha participated on that discussions but also Mahayanists. It's no good to close our eyes for the existence of Mahayanists and the ways they contributed to Theravada-ideas. (2) to me it's important to know where I'm standing on my buddhistic path, on which I think now that partly Theravada-ideas are true and partly that Mahayana-ideas are true (About the word 'true': see under) ====================================================================== = > Another question is if ["of" was a typo, Joop) the two-truth- > model (or two-realities-model, that is > the same to me) is true; or when truth doesn't exist, that is > useful? To me it is useful, in the stage now of my path. Rob: I am not clear on your question. Are you asking if truth exists? I equate the Buddha's teaching with the truth. Are you asking if the Buddha's teaching exists? If so, how do you want to define existence? I am confused Joop: To me Buddha's teachings are not the truth; they are talking about the truth; and that is for us human beings only possible in language, so in concepts. I define the 'existence' of something on a phenomenological way but when and because that something vibrates in me. I think that on the long run the perceived difference between conceptual and ultimate realities disappears or changes into something else. I can not know that on this moment (of my path) and on this moment the theory of the existence of the two truths is useful. But I don't have Pali-quotes on this opinion and perhaps it's too much mysticism to you. Metta Joop 39435 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 4:17am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 155 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 3 ahetuka kiriya cittas or 3 rootless functional consciousness or 3 rootless inoperational consciousness. 2 cittas of these 3 cittas are universal to all beings while 1 ahetuka kiriya citta is strictly and completely confined to arahats only. 1. upekkha saha gatam pancadvaravajjana citta 2. upekkha saha gatam manodvaravajjana citta 3. somanassa sahagatam hasituppada citta The first citta is pancadvaravajjana citta. This citta is panca dvara avajjana citta. Panca means 'five'. Dvara means 'door'. Pancadvara here means 'five sense doors'. Avajjana means 'adverting' 'turning the attention to' 'contemplating on arammana'. Avajjana is made up of Aa and vajjana. Aa here means 'arammana'. Vajjana means 'contemplation'. When there arises an arammana, this citta does the job of contemplation whether the arammana is at eye or ear or at nose or tongue or at body. It transfers appropriately to the next citta which may be one of 10 panvavinnana cittas. This is like shunting, transferring, adverting. In this citta, there arise 7 universal cetasikas. Phassa or contact makes meeting of the pancadvaravajjana citta, panvarammana or one of 5 sense object, and cakkhuppasada or eye-sense-base. Vedana or feeling feels as upekkha or indifferent that is not good or not bad. Cetana or volition urges to take that object. Sanna/ perception marks the object. Ekaggata or one-pointedness points at the object only. Jivitindriya maintains mental life including the life of all these cetasikas and citta. Manasikara or attention chooses the right direction to the object. So in pancadvaravajjana citta, all 7 universal cetasikas arise. Moreover, vitakka also arises doing putting the citta to that particular object of pancarammana or one of 5 sense-object. Vicara who is the close friend of vitakka also arises in pancadvaravajjana citta and it does the job of reviewing on the object and it would not leave the object. As pancadvaravajjana has to transfer the object to someone who is one of 5, this citta has to decide who to give. So adhimokkha cetasika does have to arise. As this citta is upekkha citta, piti does not arise. There does not arise chanda or wish as there is no need to arise wish in performing this job of transferring. As there are conditions such as arising of arammana or object, arising of pasada or vatthu that serves as dvara, and arising of attention to that object, pancadvaravajjana citta has to arise and there is no will or wish arise at all. So chanda does not arise in this citta. This citta is very first citta in vithi vara. It does not need any effort in its arising. So there is no viriya at all. In summary, in pancadvaravajjana citta or 5-sense-door-adverting consciousness there arise 7 universal cetasikas, vitakka, vicara, and adhimokkha of 6 pakinnaka cetasikas. So there are in total 7 + 3 = 10 cetasikas arise with panca dvara avajjana citta. There is no sobhana cetasika at all. So there is no sobhana hetu such as alobha, adosa, anad amoha. Equally there is no akusala cetasika at all. So there is no akusala root such as lobha, dosa, and moha. In this dhamma molecule of pancadvaravajjana citta, one atom is 'citta' and other 10 atoms are cetasikas phassa, vedana, cetana, sanna, ekaggata, jivitindriya, manasikara, vitakka, vicara, and adhimokkha. All these dhamma link each other inseparably and makes a dhamma molecule called pancadvaravajjana citta. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39436 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 4:32am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 156 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, Another ahetuka kiriya citta universal to all being is called 'upekkha saha gatam manodvaravajjana citta'. Unlike pancadvaravajjana citta, this citta has an extra duty. It does the job of votthapana or determining on the object. Because of this all following 7 javana cittas have a clear role what to do on the object and they all arise as mental impulse in 7 successive moments. In such a decision to be made, there takes a lot of energy and there does need effort or viriya. While viriya cetasika or effort does not arise in pancadvaravajjana citta, viriya does arise in manodvaravajjana citta. So in manodvaravajjana citta, there are phassa or contact, vedana or feeling, cetana or volition, sanna or perception, ekaggata or one- pointedness, jivitindriya or mental life, manasikara or attention, vitakka or initial application, vicara or sustained application, adhimokkha or decision, and viriya or effort altogether 11 cetasikas have to arise to assist the king citta manodvaravajjana citta. Again, in this ahetuka kiriya citta, there is no beautiful root such as alobha, adosa, amoha. So this citta is also called asobhana citta or non-beautiful consciousness. As there is also no akusala root such as lobha, dosa, moha, this citta is called rootless or ahetuka citta. So manodvaravajjana citta is an upekkha citta. It is kiriya citta or functional consciousness or inoperational consciousness. It is also rootless consciousness or ahetuka citta as explained above. In this citta of dhamma molecule, components atoms are citta and 11 cetasikas. They all mix inseparably and this is known as sampayutta paccaya. While arising together these 11 cetasikas do their own functions and assist the citta and this makes the name 'upekkha saha gatam manodvaravajjana citta'. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39437 From: Ken O Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 5:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Giving a Smile Hi Friends James Maybe you would like to consider Right Thoughts in the 8NP <> Thought of goodwill and thought of not harming - this is metta thought of renunication that is thought of renunciation of sensual pleasure. this is non-greed :) - generosity So say Buddha never taught generosity. It is a matter to look at it more carefully. Ken O 39438 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 6:53am Subject: Re: Giving a Smile --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > Hi Friends James thought of renunication that is thought of renunciation of sensual > pleasure. this is non-greed :) - generosity > > So say Buddha never taught generosity. It is a matter to look at it > more carefully. > > > > Ken O Friend Ken O, Renunciation isn't simply "non-greed". Where did you find that definition? Renunciation is a process that is both outer and inner. When the Buddha renounced his worldly life and the bhikkhus who followed him renounced their worldly life, they weren't being generous to anyone. Also, when the Buddha renounced his very life, on the eve of his enlightenment ("I shall become enlightened or die in the effort"), he also wasn't being generous to anyone. Allow me to give some analysis by a bhikkhu much more learned in this subject than myself, from "The Manual of the Factors Leading to Enlightenment" by Ledi Sayadaw: "For those persons who look forward to meeting the next Buddha Sasana, Dana, síla uposatha, and the seven saddhamma are the essentials…For those who wish to become sotápanna's during this life, there is no special necessity to practice Dana (alms-giving). But let those who find it unable to evoke sufficient effort towards acquiring the ability to obtain release from worldly ills during the present Buddha Sasana make special attempts to practice Dana (alms- giving) and uposatha (precepts observed on fasting days)." http://www.buddhistinformation.com/bodhipakkhiya_dipani.htm In summary, though very important, dana doesn't lead to enlightenment, it only leads to a higher rebirth. Metta, James 39439 From: Hugo Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 7:28am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) On Mon, 6 Dec 2004 06:00:36 +0800 (CST), Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Are you saying here that the smiling is kusala, and/or that with the > extinguishmnet of the anger there is kusala in its place? No. I am saying that I use the "forced smile" as a tool to prevent the anger (that already arose) to take more force and "lead me" to make akusala actions. > It seems to me that unless kusala is being developed, then what we are > talking about is just a handy 'anger management' technique. YES!!,, Bingo!!!, bingo!! That's EXACTLY what I am talking about, it is JUST a tool. That's why in one of my comments (the one about the anaesthetic) I said to watch out and not become attached to either, the anaesthetic or the smile. Why?, because if you get attached to the smile, and think that is the real solution to your problems you will never see the root cause of your problems. Also, that's why in many other posts I have said something like: 1) Calm your mind (in this case I use the "forced smile") 2) Investigate what defilements are in your mind 3) Work on removing those defilements. Also, if you want yet another analogy, it is like putting those little wheels on the bycicle so kids can learn how to ride. Yes, some people might not like them and try to learn without them, but it is easier to learn if you have the little wheels, but if you depend on them you will never learn and will never want to remove them. Everything is a tool, you have to know how, when and for how much time you use it. A few months ago I tried to teach my son to ride a trycicle, he couldn't coordinate the move of his feet. I placed his feet on the pedals, then I pushed the trycicle so he felt how the feet moved, he was "absorbed" to this and didn't know how to make turns, so I had to drive too. Days later he was able to pedal by himself (I still had to make turns, even though he made a few on his own), then winter came and we had to interrupt the training, but I hope that next spring/summer he will be able to do everything at once. Should I stop helping him and let him figure out by himself how to move the feet?, actually I tried a couple of times, but it only made him frustrated and he didn't want to touch the trycicle at all!! He needed those sessions where I pushed the trycicle, the same way I need the forced smile technique to prevent the anger to get more strenght. > Less anger is > obviously 'desirable' in many respects, but it doesn't necessarily mean > less akusala, either right away or, more importantly, later, as I see it. If you just stay with "smiling" without understanding the roots of anger, it doesn't help you in the long run, also if you then generate craving for smiling, that is not good either. Now, why I thought it was important to talk about this even if it is "just a handy 'anger management' technique", because we need to be practical when approaching the Buddha's teaching. When I used to give computer classes to people, if I started explaining about how the computer works internally, some people got bored and stopped paying attention, some even stopped attending classes. When I realized that a different approach was needed, I focused on teaching what they needed and intersped the "fundamentals" along the way as needed. In other words, I chose a practical approach then, when appropriate I sneaked some explanation of the internals. The result, the students were happier and they really learned both, the practical and the internals, and they were able to DO SOMETHING (e.g. write documents, read email, etc.), instead of just memorizing something that they couldn't see (e.g. memory, bytes and bits, etc.) Greetings, -- Hugo 39440 From: m. nease Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 7:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" [Sukin] Hi Howard, ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 8:19 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" [Sukin] > > Hi again, Mike - > > In a message dated 12/5/04 11:14:55 PM Eastern Standard Time, > upasaka@a... > writes: > >> All elements of all khandhas in non-arahants are infected by avijja >> ====================== > That is an overstatement. The links in D.O. are all so infected. But > rupas are not. Sights, sounds, tastes, etc are, in themselves, innocent. Thanks for this clarification--so phassa and vedanaa are 'infected'? All an interesting and novel (to me at least) take on pa.ticcasamuppaada--I'll give it some thought, thanks again. mike 39441 From: Hugo Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 7:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Dear Bhante, On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 09:47:08 -0500, Bhante Vimalaramsi wrote: > It may help to stop trying to be so analytical and demanding that reality > arise the way you want it to. A lighter approach works much better. I > have hesitated to bring this up on this website because it won't be > understood very well. Don't worry there are some "I" that understand you very well!! :-) > But what the heck, if you can develop a true sense > of humor about being caught by unwholesome thoughts, and laugh at just > how crazy mind truly is. Yes, I have tried that, or maybe I should say I think I do that all the time now, and it is great!!! It is fun to "watch" the mind jump from thinking this, to thinking that, to fabricate this about that thing you just saw or heard. Sometimes, or most of the times it is as if it was two "I"'s, one who watches and one who thinks, fabricates, etc. I guess if I keep doing this, I will feel that there are three "I", one who watches that one who watches, and the one who thinks, fabricates, etc.. No, wait, actually I already saw that while driving, it is great. When I am tired and getting sleepy while driving I put some music, depending on how sleepy is the kind of music I choose, sometimes is really fast and dancing-like music. I can see the following: there is one "I" who listens to the music and prevents the rest to go to sleep, there is one "I" who does "discursive thinking", this discursive thinking is completely UNRELATED to the music and sometimes I think it is really profound as I have gotten good insights while doing it. There is one "I" who keeps driving. I just need to figure out if there is yet another "I" who is tapping the floor at the rythm of the music, it might be the same one that listens, but I can't figure it out yet. :-) If that is not a "feeling" of anatta, then what it is!, because then there is this other "I" who watches the whole show!!! Greetings, -- Hugo 39442 From: Hugo Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 8:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Value of discussion (was evil thoughts) Hello Andrew, On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 08:35:38 -0000, Andrew wrote: > Do you think it is possible to directly know something and later call > it to mind such that you can say "back then, I had a moment when I > directly knew such-and-such"? I am not sure what you meant, I read it once, prepared a reply, then read it again and my reply didn't make sense to my second interpretation. > This isn't a trick debating question. Don't answer it if you don't > feel like it. Anyone else who would like to chime in, please do so. > FYI I have a feeling that we worldlings can't recall any moments of > direct knowing. But I could be wrong ... mmm....maybe I see what you mean, I don't know, but I think that if you know something you don't need to recall it, it is there. Like some teachers told us at school, the exam should be finished promptly, if you know it, you know it, you don't have to sit the whole hour trying to remember it. Does my reply makes sense to your question? Greetings, -- Hugo 39443 From: Hugo Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 8:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Value of discussion (was evil thoughts) Hello Sarah, On Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:49:03 +0000 (GMT), sarah abbott wrote: > S: With respect, I think the mistake is in 'trying to pull up wholesome > states' and assuming that a particular scenario, in this kind the smile, > is indicative of wholesome states, as Ken O and Phil have been stressing. > > On our recent trip, a friend asked about 'tears' and whether they only > accompanied unwholesome states. The reply was that when we think like this > -- of some particular situation such as the smiling or the tearful one -- > there is no understanding of presently appearing dhammas and in effect, > we're trying to 'work out' the various kinds of consciousness in a > situation, taking such a situation for being a reality. > > Whenever there is wanting something, whether it is to having wholesome > states, to knowing more about the Tipitaka, to doing good things, there's > bound to be lobha (attachment, wanting something for oneself and > expectations again. When there's lobha, there's no panna (understanding) > and it's hard to see because it's not what we wish to see. For the records, I agree with all of the above. See message #39439 for a better description of what I meant with my "forced smile" technique. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/39439 Greetings, -- Hugo 39444 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 8:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Rob K, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" > > > > > My point is that the Buddha's teaching was not focused on > realities > > > and non-realities (concepts). Acariya Anuruddha used ultimate > > > realities as a structure to summarize the Abhidhamma when he > wrote > > > the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, but ultimate realities are not an > > > element of the Buddha's teaching. A cursory reading of the > > > Abhidhammattha Sangaha gives the incorrect impression that > > > ontological issues (realities vs. non-realities) is an important > > > part of the Buddha's teaching. > > > > ========== > Dear RobM, > I think seeing what is reality (dhamma) and what is not is stressed > throught the teachings. > The Udanaatthakatha (trans. masefield p.878)Blind from birth > chapter:"since they do not know Dhamma, they do not know that which > is not > Dhamma either. ....... they neither know dhamma to be a thing having > an owm nature (sabhava), nor do they know that which is not dhamma > to > be a thing lacking an own nature.(Dhammam sabhavadhammam..adhammam > asabhavadhammam) And as such they declare a thing having an own > nature as though it were a thing lacking an own nature....""endquote > This passage was written hundreds of years before Anuruddha was born. ===== If we are talking about "Dhammas" then you and I are in complete agreement. In a recent post to Andrew (message 39403), I explained that the first step of "fully understanding" (parinna) is nataparinna; breaking things into component dhammas and indentifying characterisitic / function / manifestation/ proximate cause of each dhamma. I have never said that "dhammas" are not a key element of the Buddha's teaching. What I am questioning is the association of "dhamma" with an ontological "ultimate reality". In your message above, you wrote, "I think seeing what is reality (dhamma) and what is not is stressed throught the teachings." If you had written, "I think seeing what are dhammas is stressed throught the teachings.", then I would have agreed with you 100%. However, you have made it into an ontological statement which I do not think finds any support in the texts. Consider the opening question of the Dhammasangani, "Katame dhamma kusala?" or "What dhammas are good?" (I know that most translate "dhammas" as "states" in this context, but I prefer to leave it as dhammas as that is what we are discussing). The Dhammasangani then proceeds to give a list of dhammas as follows: (i) contact (phasso) (ii) feeling (vedana) (iii) perception (sanna) (iv) volition (cetana) (v) thought (cittam) (vi) application (vitakko) (vii) sustained thinking (vicaro) (viii) zest (piti) (ix) ease (sukham) (x) self-collectedness (cittass'ekaggata) (xi) the faculty of faith (saddhindriyam) (xii) the faculty of energy (viriyindriyam) (xiii) the faculty of mindfulness (satindriyam) (xiv) the faculty of concentration (samadhindriyam) (xv) the faculty of insight (pannindriyam) (xvi) the faculty of ideation (manindriyam) (xvii) the faculty of gladness (somanassondriyam) (xviii) the faculty of life (jivitindriyam) (xix) right views (samma-ditthi) (xx) right intention (samma-sankappo) (xxi) right endeavour (samma-vayamo) (xxii) right mindfulness (sammasati) (xxiii) right concentration (sammasamadhi) (xxiv) the power of faith (saddhabalam) (xxv) the power of energy (viriyabalam) (xxvi) the power of mindfulness (satibalam) (xxvii) the power of concentration (samadhibalam) (xxviii) the power of insight (pannabalam) (xxix) the power of conscientiousness (hiribalam) (xxx) the power of the fear of blame (ottappabalam) (xxxi) absence of greed (alobho) (xxxii) absence of hate (adoso) (xxxiii) absence of dullness (amoho) (xxxiv) absence of covetousness (anabhijjha) (xxxv) absence of malice (avyapado) (xxxvi) right views (sammaditthi) (xxxvii) conscientiousness (hiri) (xxxviii) fear of blame (ottappam) (xxxix) serenity in mind (cittapassaddhi) (xl) serenity of mental factors (kayapassaddhi) (xli) lightness in mind (cittalahuta) (xlii) lightness in mental factors (kayalahuta) (xliii) plasticity in mind (cittamuduta) (xliv) plasticity in mental factors (kayamuduta) (xlv) facility in mind (cittakammannata) (xlvi) facility in mental factors (kayakammannata) (xlvii) fitness in mind (cittapugunnata) (xlviii) fitness in mental factors (kayapagunnata) (xlix) directness in mind (cittujjukata) (l) directness in mental factors (kayujjukata) (li) mindfulness (sati) (lii) intelligence (sampajannam) (liii) quiet (samatho) (liv) intuition (vipassana) (lv) grasp (paggaho) (lvi) balance (avikkhepo) Now these – or whatever other incorporeal, causally induced dhammas there are on that occasion – these are the dhammas that are good. Let us consider this list of dhammas and see if it makes sense to interpret this list as a list of "ultimate realities". If the author of the Dhammasangani had really intended to be listing "ultimate realities" in an ontological sense, does it make sense that he would list as seven separate dhammas: - faculty of insight (xv - pannindriyam) - right views (xix - samma-ditthi) - power of insight (xxviii - pannabalam) - absence of dullness (xxxiii - amoho) - a second aspect of right views (xxxvi - samma-ditthi) - intelligence (lii – sampajannam) - intuition (liv – vipassana) The author then goes on to say that these seven dhammas are really the same thing (what Acariya Anuruddha calls "panna"). As you know, this is but one example of repetition in the list. To me, this indicates that "dhamma" does not mean "ultimate reality" when used in this context. The fact that in the Suttas, the Buddha made only one ontological statement (thanks for locating SNXXII.94 for me), suggests to me that we should not try to turn "dhammas" into "ultimate realities". I am becoming convinced that Acariya Anuruddha used an ontological approach as a tool to summarize the vast literature of the Abhidhamma and that we should not take this ontological focus literally as it is not supported in the primary texts. With tongue firmly in cheek, perhaps I should suggest to the moderators that they change the description of DSG from "...with the aim of developing precise understanding of the realities of the present moment." into "...with the aim of developing precise understanding of the dhammas of the present moment." :-) :-) Metta, Rob M :-) 39445 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 9:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Larry, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > The concept of concept came from the abhidhamma pitaka and there is a > little discussion of it in Vism. and more in the main commentary to > Vism. So I don't think we can blame or credit Acarya Anuruddha for > starting this controversy. ===== I agree that concept (pannatti) is found in the Patthana (one of the conditioning states for pakatupanissaya) but I don't read this as being an ontological statement (reality vs. non-reality). Similarly, I don't think that pannatti is used in an ontological fashion in the Visuddhimagga or its commentary (correct me if I am wrong here). What Acariya Anuruddha did was to introduce ontology as a technique to summarize the Abhidhamma when writing the Abhidhamatthasangaha. Keeping in mind that Acariya Anuruddha's intention was to write an introductory piece to the Abhidhamma and that Acariya Anuruddha fully expected the reader to go on to read the primary texts for themselves, I don't think that this was a misunderstanding of Acariya Anuruddha, it was simply a literary technique. Considering the magnitude of his task, we gotta cut the guy some slack and allow him some artistic license :-) ===== > > L: So if you think sa~n~naa has something to do with concept you could > look at its use in the suttas. Similarly sankhara khandha. > ===== One issue at a time :-) At some point, I will get around to analyzing sanna and sankhara in mor detail :-) ===== > Also I think the word "reality" is a little harsh. Instead of "concept > and reality" we might think of this duo as impermanence and illusion. > Both are to be degrasped. Sometimes teachers build up reality as an easy > way to devalue concept but this can lead to a misleading valuation of > reality as something superior. Inferiority and superiority will only be > found in how we view these dhammas, not in the dhammas themselves, imo. ===== As you may have noticed, I am also rebelling against the term "reality". I like the term "dhammas" as that is what is used in the texts. Metta, Rob M :-) 39446 From: Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 4:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi, Robert (and Rob M) - In a message dated 12/6/04 1:49:11 AM Eastern Standard Time, rjkjp1@y... writes: > Dear RobM, > I think seeing what is reality (dhamma) and what is not is stressed > throught the teachings. > The Udanaatthakatha (trans. masefield p.878)Blind from birth > chapter:"since they do not know Dhamma, they do not know that which > is not > Dhamma either. ....... they neither know dhamma to be a thing having > an owm nature (sabhava), nor do they know that which is not dhamma > to > be a thing lacking an own nature.(Dhammam sabhavadhammam..adhammam > asabhavadhammam) And as such they declare a thing having an own > nature as though it were a thing lacking an own nature....""endquote > This passage was written hundreds of years before Anuruddha was born. > Robert > > > ========================= Robert, this is from the commentary on the Udana. Is there anything comparable in the Udana, itself? I happen to agree that the Buddha distinguished among degrees, levels and modes of existence, but it seems to me that he didn't make much of an issue of it, certainly not as much as the commentators. He made much more of an issue of distinguishing among degrees, levels and modes of cognition. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39447 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 9:18am Subject: Re: Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Joop, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jwromeijn" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" > wrote: > ... > Dear Rob, > > Rob: I do not know enough Buddhist history to make a statement. What > is important to me is that the two-truth model as you call it is not > central to the primary texts. Which group originated the idea and who > might of copied it from whom is of some intellectual interest, but > not a key issue for me. > > Joop: I don't like the discussion-trick to call something you don't > like (only) of intellectual interest. > Which group originated the idea of the two truths (conceptual and > ultimate) is as such not of interest. > I have two reactions on it: > (1) for understanding an idea (for example that of the two truths), > we have to understand the history of that idea, and the discuusions > between groups about that idea. Not only the monks composing the > Abhidhamma or Buddhaghosa or Acariya Anuruddha participated on that > discussions but also Mahayanists. It's no good to close our eyes for > the existence of Mahayanists and the ways they contributed to > Theravada-ideas. > (2) to me it's important to know where I'm standing on my buddhistic > path, on which I think now that partly Theravada-ideas are true and > partly that Mahayana-ideas are true (About the word 'true': see under) > ===== I am sorry if my approach came across as a "discussion-trick"; it was not my intention. If somebody were to identify an essay on this subject, I would eagerly read it as the subject is truly of interest to me. On the other hand, I am not going to engage on an active literature search (as I have done to identify ontological elements in primary texts) to trace the history of this idea. In my black-and-white engineer mind, an idea was either in the primary texts or it was a later addition. In my simplistic view, "who later", "when later", "where later", "how later", "why later" and "which later" are all grouped together under "later". For my practice, I want to put more focus on what was in the primary texts and much less focus on what was added "later". ===== > ===================================================================== = > = > > Another question is if ["of" was a typo, Joop) the two-truth- > > model (or two-realities-model, that is > > the same to me) is true; or when truth doesn't exist, that is > > useful? To me it is useful, in the stage now of my path. > > Rob: I am not clear on your question. Are you asking if truth exists? > I equate the Buddha's teaching with the truth. Are you asking if the > Buddha's teaching exists? If so, how do you want to define existence? > I am confused > > Joop: To me Buddha's teachings are not the truth; they are talking > about the truth; and that is for us human beings only possible in > language, so in concepts. > I define the 'existence' of something on a phenomenological way but > when and because that something vibrates in me. > I think that on the long run the perceived difference between > conceptual and ultimate realities disappears or changes into > something else. I can not know that on this moment (of my path) and > on this moment the theory of the existence of the two truths is > useful. But I don't have Pali-quotes on this opinion and perhaps it's > too much mysticism to you. ===== Sounds like a deeply personal experience... one that does not readily resonate in my mind. Bottom line.... I don't think I can help you much or comment further :-) Metta, Rob M :-) 39448 From: Bhante Vimalaramsi Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 8:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] I tried it and liked it! (was Re: Bhante and Smiling ) Dhamma Greetings Phil, When you said: "This is where we will disagree, again. The pleasantness I was feeling was not necessary a wholesome state." Bhante*** It is true and it is easier to recognize a pleasant feeling especially when that pleasant feeling changes to a painful feeling. Of course, painful and pleasant feeling are two sides of the same coin when seen with true equanimity and mindfulness, feeling is just feeling whether it is pleasant or painful, right? If there is no judging that this feeling is good and that feeling is bad, then they are same coin but different sides. The definition of 'chanda' (as given to me by my teacher Sayadaw U Silananda) is wholesome desire that points mind in the direction of liberation. Then when you said: "So if I "recognize that an unwholesome state has arisen", that recognizing is in itself a wholesome state. It is a small step towards detachment from the unwholesome state. When I regenerated the smile and the pleasant feeling, it was - in my opinion at this time- a lunge away from insight towards comfort." Bhante*** Isn't comfort another way of saying that there is no more suffering? And if one follows the entire instruction given about Right Effort there has to be more than just the recognizing of a wholesome state, it says that one develops it by staying with that wholesome state and the smile is a tool that makes this easier to do. This is not a "lunge away from insight, but towards it. Why? Because it helps one to stay aware and mindful of what is happening in the present moment. I find it interesting that many people don't see that greed (lobha) and aversion (dosa) are the same thing, they are both attachments but are different sides of the same coin. If one has a strong dislike to something they are just as attached to that dislike, just like when one has strong greed. The only difference is the kind of feeling that accompanies it. It is either lobha or dosa but the attachment to it is the same. One kind of attachment is "Hey, I like this and want more" and the other kind of attachment is "Hey, I really don't like this, I want it to go away". This is the attachment to a belief that either the pleasant feeling or the painful feeling is "Mine" and this is atta not anatta. When you said: "It did for me, but in my case I felt that putting the smile back did not indicate a wholesome mental state but rather an unwholesome one, an attachment to pleasant feeling." Bhante*** And therein lies the problem because I said that the person also wishes happiness along with the smile and just because a pleasant feeling arises, it doesn't mean that this is unwholesome. It all comes down to the individual and their own perspective. The sincere smile and the making of the wish for happiness, changes the whole process away from a personal self doing something to an impersonal wish for happiness. And this is wholesome. It takes more than just pasting a smile on one's face, it takes sincere effort to make a wish for well being and happiness in an impersonal way. At that time, mind is free from defilements and it is wholesome. I think this may help you. When you said: "I can see this. I'm thinking these days that I will be returning to the meditation cushion one day soon for another go at insight meditation." Bhante*** This makes joy and a smile arise in me, thank you. One thing that I truly marvel at is the way many people think insight is one thing and any other practice is another. When one practices metta and smile and relaxes their mind and body, they are practicing insight and tranquility at the same time. There is no need to divide the two practices up, this only causes confusion and slows down one's spiritual progress. Metta can be a form of vipassana (mindfulness) just like the breathing meditation is, if one follows the instructions about tranquilizing the bodily and mental formations often. I have taught and practiced this for over ten years and have seen many insights into the true nature of all existence arise not only in myself but in my students as well. Please don't think that samatha is one thing and vipassana is another. In the Majjhima Nikaya sutta # 149 it says that they are joined or yoked together and this is the way to practice metta. With both insight and calmness. Also, please remember the 4th factor of enlightenment is joy. Smiling helps the enlightenment factor of joy arise, "eventually", and this is a wholesome state. You said: "For me, joy arises at unexpected moments in a flooding way, but I have only begun to figure this out." Bhante*** Actually from abhidhamma one can learn that there are five different types of joy. I won't use the Pali to describe them but you can look them up if you want further info. 1] the first type of joy is a happy feeling and goosebumps arise on your skin. This lasts for just a brief time then disappears. It is followed by a short feeling of well being and calmness. 2] the second type of joy is a happy feeling that is very intense and is describe as being like a flash of lightening. This feeling of strong happiness lasts for a little longer than the previous joy and when this feeling fades away there is a deep sense of calmness and well being. This calm and well being can last for a few minutes and is very pleasant. This type of joy arises (from my own practice) when one has a decision to make that is a hard one, but when you finally decide which way to go and you make the right decision this flash of joy arises. 3] the 3rd type of joy is like you are standing in the ocean and waves of joy arise and wash over you, wave after wave of happiness washes over you. This is very pleasant and when the joy fades away there is a very deep kind of tranquility and sense of well being that can last for a longer period of time, 20 or 30 minutes or so. Now these kinds of joy can happen to anyone at anytime, when the conditions are right. They take no special mental development and are not the spiritual joy that the Buddha referred to. The next two kinds of joy will only arise through deep calm and mental development. 4] the 4th type of joy is called "uplifting joy", this only happens the a person who has practiced meditation deeply and has let go of an attachment. Both body and mind feeling kind of like they are floating and feel very light. When this kind of joy fades away then there is a strong feeling of tranquility and clarity like has never been felt before. Mind stays on the object of meditation without any effort at all. This feeling can last for a long time, an hour or two or more, depending on the person experiencing it. This is the other worldly joy that is described in the suttas as being the jhana factor of joy. One's mindfulness and tranquility are exceptional at that time and with some practice can be felt during one's daily activities. 5] the 5th type of joy is called the "overflowing joy" and this is the enlightenment factor of joy, this kind of joy just kind of bubbles out of every cell in one's body. Where all of the previous kinds of joy had a little excitement in them, this kind of joy doesn't. Mind is very calm and happy at that time. This kind of joy can last for a long, long time, days! And when peace and calm is unbelievably nice. This is another type of unworldly joy described in the suttas. One strange thing that happens for some people when they experience this type of overflowing joy is that when they are sitting their eyes will automatically open up. This is what the artists of Buddha images try to show when they portray the Buddha sitting in meditation with a serene smile on his face and his eyes partly open. It makes me very happy to think that you will begin doing some sitting practice again and please remember that this is only your quiet time to watch how mind works very intensely. The whole of one's life is meditation as you are already observing. Thank you again, it makes me smile lots. One thing I tell my students before they go out into their daily life is to be happy and smile. Maha-Metta always Bhante Vimalaramsi 39449 From: Bhante Vimalaramsi Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 8:36am Subject: Re: Chanda ( was Re: [dsg] I tried it and liked it! (was Re: Bhante and Smiling ) Dhamma Greetings Phil, I have the tendency to go with what my teacher says about Chanda, it makes more sense to me. Maha-Metta always Bhante Vimalaramsi 39450 From: Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 4:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Evil thoughts (Rob M) Hi, Ken - In a message dated 12/6/04 3:46:06 AM Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@y... writes: > Before the Tathagata arose in the world, the highest form of wisdom > was (I think) jhana absorption. ==================== Perhaps on the Indian subcontinent - I don't know. But there was greater wisdom than merely jhana attainment expressed in the world earlier on, in other places. For example, one might consider the writings of Solomon (970-928 BCE) as recorded in Ecclesiastes. Much that is expressed there, particularly if translated well, is a foreshadowing of the teachings of anatta and dukkha. (I do NOT mean to suggest a wisdom comparable to the Buddha's, however - just wisdom going beyond the recorded wisdom of the predecessors of the Buddha in his part of the world.) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39451 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 9:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Ken O, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > Hi Rob M > > > From SNXXII.94, it is clear that the Buddha said that the five > > aggregates do exist (Bhikkhu Bodhi's commentary explains that they > > exist as impermanent processes). As far as I know, this is the only > > time that the Buddha made an ontological statement regarding > > existence / non-existence. According to Bhikkhu Bodhi's commentary, > > the Buddha made this statement to refute a specific type of wrong > > view (illusionist theories that the world lacks existence). > > k: So does that contradict what Buddha say that D.O exist and 4NT. > In one sutta Buddha says D.O exist. The fundamental question should > be is self (a concept) a reality. Self does not exist but the > attachment to a view to self exist, is a reality. Buddha say there > is no self in aggregates, so do self exist then? ===== When the Buddha said that "DO exists", I do not interpret this as meaning that "DO is an 'ultimate reality' in an ontological sense". Same with four noble truths. The Buddha said that there is nothing that we can point to as "self", none of the five aggregates are self. In SNXXII.94, the Buddha said that the five aggregates exist to refute illusionist theories. In my opinion, this ontological statement does not promote the five aggregates to "ultimate reality" status (in fact, Acariya Anuruddha does not count sankhara as an "ultimate reality", he counts sankhara as a collection of "ultimate realities"; this is in spite of the fact that the Buddha said that sankhara "exists". ===== > > > In SNXXII.94 the Buddha did say that the five aggregates are real > > (in an ontological sense) to refute a specific wrong view. I am not > aware of any Sutta where the Buddha said that concepts are "not > real". If you are aware of any other ontological statements > proclaimed by the Buddha, please advise. > > k: We must first differentiat that does concepts exist - yes only in > the mental construct, but do it has reality - No. Other than exist > as a imaginary construct, they do not exist as a reality that can be > directly known ===== Why are we concerned with the ontological classification of "concepts"? The Buddha said that "sankhara" exists and is real, but the Abhidhammatthasangaha says that "sankhara" is a concept for a group of cetasikas with no separate existence. ===== > > Lets look at Mulapariyaya Sutta which you quoted earlier, > > Worldings -- <> > > Arahants -- <> > > There is no reference that concepts exist as reality, why, please > note that <>. ===== Sorry Ken O, I may not have understood your last point. If you are saying that the Buddha used the same term "comprehend" for both "realities" and "concepts", then I agree that the Sutta does not differentiate. Metta, Rob M :-) 39452 From: Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 4:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: AN III - 100 mental misconduct vs. thoughts of ill-will Hi, James (and Sarah) - In a message dated 12/6/04 5:35:50 AM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > Friend Sarah, > > Hi there!! Gosh, long time no chat. Well, lucky for me I took the > day off from work. I really like your post because it is very > direct: > > Sarah: Let me ask you. If a defilement, lets say attachment, has > arisen, do you think the Buddha encouraged us to be aware of it at > such a time with awareness, detachment and understanding, or was > something else > recommended? > > James: To be aware of one's attachment with detachment? That would > be quite a trick! ;-)) Seriously, I know what you are getting at but > it seems that you are forgetting the defilement of delusion. We are > all suffering from delusion so it isn't always possible to be really > aware of one's defilements. We take the beautiful for ugly, the > ugly for beautiful, the impermanent for permanent,…etc. Not only > that, in a worldling the defilement of attachment is arising almost > constantly! When is there ever really a moment without attachment? > As far as what the Buddha taught, he taught that one should purify > the mind by following the Noble Eightfold Path; this would include > cultivating sila, samadhi, and panna. > > ------- Snip of remainder in accordance with recent moderator urging! ;-) ------- ========================= Geez, I just have to say this: I was so pleased at Sarah's post that expressed the *possibility* of acting, taking steps, directing the mind, and accomplishing, and that urged the doing of this. It was just the opposite of the sort of expression of helplessness and hopelessness that I've criticized elsewhere (with great approbation and acclamation ... NOT!! ;-). And here, James, I find you, a fellow promoter of kusala and active cetana, engaging in nay-saying! Of course, James, we are starting out enmeshed in delusion, and many of our attempts will be thwarted. But we are where we are. We *must* act to escape out prison cell, else we will serve an endless number of consecutive life sentences. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39453 From: Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 5:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" [Sukin] Hi, Mike - In a message dated 12/6/04 10:44:10 AM Eastern Standard Time, mlnease@z... writes: > Thanks for this clarification--so phassa and vedanaa are 'infected'? =================== Yes. As I see it, for a worldling - for any non-arahant, for that matter - phassa is the contact of an apparent subject with an apparent object through a connecting sense-door, and vedana is "I like" or "I dislike" or "I am neutral about". Neither is uninfected. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39454 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 10:14am Subject: Five Natural Laws, Panca Niyama Dear Dhamma Friends, There are five natural laws. They are called five niyama dhamma. They govern themselves and no one is dictating anything but these five natural laws dictate things to happen. Let us have an investigation into all the phenomena in the whole universe. Mathematicians well understand when 'universal set' is used. I am not trying to post 'set theory'. But there the is universe and there is nothing outside the universe. When we are talking or discussing these things, let us leave 'I' 'we' 'the speaker' alone and let us focus on what we are talking. Let us assume that there is nothing in the universe. OK. There is nothing in the whole universe. There is no matter. There is no material. As there is nothing, there is no life and there is no being. As there is nothing at all, there is nothing and no law has to act. Once there is a matter. OK. There is a matter in the whole universe. As soon as that matter exists, the natural law of utu exists. It is utu niyama. This may be physics or any science. Whenever there is a matter, there is solidity. There is integrity. There is cohesion. There is innate temperature. This is not just intellectual thinking. But it is utu niyama. That matter may be a small mass or a hugh mass. Actually there is no measure at all. But because of movement and motion that matter may become separated into two or three or into millions pieces. It may expand or it may collapse. Some collapse and some expand. At some time there is a unique structure of matter. Actually that structure is within the domain of utu niyama. As matter moves, integrates and disintegrate there forms acids, alkalis, metals, gas, elements etc etc. Once there is an acid. That acid is deoxyribonucleic acid. Acid has tendency to form salts like sodium chloride(NaCl), sodium sulphate(Na2So4), sodium phosphate( Na3PO4) etc etc. Nucleic acids are acids that are found in the nucleus of cells of living things and living beings. Cells are the building block of living things and living beings. Each cell is made up of cell-boundry called cell membrance, nucleus and cellular fluid called cytoplasm. Nucleic acids are acids mainly found in nucleus. So deoxyribonucleic acids can be found in the nucleus of cells. That acid also tends to form salts like other acids. That salt is called deoxyribonucleoside. This salt forms as the backbone for another structure called bases. There are two types of bases. They are purine bases and pyrimidine bases. Purine bases are 'Adenine' and 'Guanine'. Pyrimidine bases are 'Cytosine' and 'Thymine'. When these bases are combined with the backbone of deoxyribonucleoside, the resultant structure is called deoxyribonucleotide. Deoxyribonucleotides when paired are stable structure. They pair in the unique way. Adenine molecule has 2 ring structures linked together and Thymine molecule has 1 ring structure. Nucleotides are only stable when there are 3 rings. Guanine molecule has 2 rings and Adenine molecule also has 2 rings. But Cytosine molecules has 1 ring and Thymine molecule also has only 1 ring. To form a stable structure, there are unique way of pairing. 2 ringed Adenine has to pair with 1 ringed Thymine. They are bound together with 2 hydrogen bonds. A-T is a base pair and forms a stable nucleotide. Another pair is G-C. 2 ringed Guanine has to pair with 1 ringed Cytosine. They are bound together with 3 hydrogen bonds. G-C is also a base pair and form a stable structure nucleotide. A always pairs with T and T with A. G always pairs with C and C with G. This is right in case of deoxyribonucleic acid structures. Deoxyribonucleic acid actually derives from deoxyribose sugar molecule. This acid is called DeoxyriboNucleic Acid and in short called 'DNA'. There is another type of sugar in cellular biology. It is ribose sugar. Its acid is ribonucleic acid and it is in short called RNA (RiboNucleic Acid). When it forms salt with phosphate, it is called ribonucleoside. When combined with base ( purine molecule and pyrimidine molecule ), it is called ribonucleotide. These nucleotides are similar to deoxyribonucleotides. The difference is sugar structure that is ribose and deoxyribose. Deoxyribose sugar has been de-oxygenated. Another difference is that that is no Thymine in RNA structure. Instead there is Uracil base to form ribonucleoside. So in RNA, G pair with C, C pair with G, A pair with U. DNA serves as genes. In a cell, there is nucleus. Nucleus is made up of nuclear membrance, nuclear fulid, and chromatin. Chromatin is made up of DNAs, histones and other DNA binding proteins. Proteins are supportive structure. DNAs carry genes. DNA is a double structure. This means there is a double strands. If one strand contains AGTTCCGATA, another strand contain in reverse order pairing like TCAAGGCTAT. Each strand is complementary to another. DNAs mainly reside in the nucleus. There is another structure called RNA. This RNA transcribe from DNA and it helps producing protein. Proteins are peptides. Peptides are polymer of monomer. Monomer here is amino acid. There are 20 essential amino acids in the body. Among them 8 are really essential. These amino acids are linked with each other with a bond called 'peptide'. Each amino acid are coded by 3 words of DNA. For example GCC, AGT, TAG. Each triplet is coded for specific amino acid. As there are 4 bases, there are 64 possible triplets codes ( 4 >< 4 >< 4 = 64 ). 3 triplets are non-sense codon (coding triplet) and when RNA carries such triplets, amino acid production stops. In this way, there is a unique way of production of intracellular proteins. Cell produces other structures and this production again is also dictated by gene which is coded in DNA of cell nucleus. Once there is DNA, there is possiblity of living thing. All living things have to follow bija niyama or genetic law. No one wrote this law. No God creates this law. If there is a matter then there is utu niyama operates. If there is DNA and living things whether plants or animals, then all living things have to follow the rule or law of genetics. Our body is matter. So it follow utu niyama. This can be seen when we die. Our body will be unsightedly and will be rotten with very bad smell if it is left untouched, untreated, unburied, uncremated. This is utu niyama. No God creates this niyama. Our body is made up of living tissues and other things. As there are living tissues, it follows bija niyama or it follows the genetic laws. Everything that happen in relation with our body is under influence of bija niyama. You see something. This is under influence of genetics. Why? For seeing to be completed, there have to happen many events in the body. Body have to synthesize, transport, store, transform etc etc. When we have disease whatever minor or major, genes involve. Every action is also under influence of gene. When there is gene, there may or may not be consciousness. For example, plants do not have consciousness. So do other lower living things in animal kingdom. When there is consciousness, then that living thing is called living being. This is savinnanaka. Sa means 'with'. Savinnanaka means 'with consciousness'. When there is consciousness or citta, that citta has to follow according to citta niyama. No one wrote this niyama including Sammasambuddhas. No God wrote this citta niyama. Whenever there is a consciousness, citta niyama governs. When cittas happen that is arises and falls away and arises and falls away, there also deal with kamma. Kamma are generated when cittas are doing the function of javana when these javana cittas are not of arahats. So when there are cittas doing their functions they are developing kamma. Once there are cittas or consciousness, there is kamma and this is the results of cittas and again kamma creates new cittas. No Buddha creates new citta. No God creates new citta. But new kamma create new and new cittas in the form of vipaka citta. Again vipaka cittas are involved in citta process and lead to javana cittas and again this create new and new kamma. No God dictates citta or kamma. When there are matter, gene, citta, kamma, they all work together and they all are under the influence od dhamma niyama. Again this is not dictated by any God and Buddha. Example is Twins-Tower event. There were people who had bad kamma to die in bodily explosion. There were possibilities of cittas which were vipaka cittas of akusala origins. The environment, the weather and all other things do not happen singly. But when there are all the necessary conditions then all happen at the same time. Whether we are considering on these or not, natural laws will be running as long as there are matters, genes, mind or consciousness or cittas, kamma, and dhamma. There are five natural laws or panca niyamas. They are 1. utu niyama 2. bija niyama 3. citta niyama 4. kamma niyama 5. dhamma niyama May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 39455 From: Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 5:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi, Rob (and Rob K) - In a message dated 12/6/04 11:52:34 AM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > The > Dhammasangani then proceeds to give a list of dhammas as follows: > (i) contact (phasso) > (ii) feeling (vedana) > (iii) perception (sanna) > (iv) volition (cetana) > (v) thought (cittam) > (vi) application (vitakko) > (vii) sustained thinking (vicaro) > (viii) zest (piti) > (ix) ease (sukham) > (x) self-collectedness (cittass'ekaggata) > (xi) the faculty of faith (saddhindriyam) > (xii) the faculty of energy (viriyindriyam) > (xiii) the faculty of mindfulness (satindriyam) > (xiv) the faculty of concentration (samadhindriyam) > (xv) the faculty of insight (pannindriyam) > (xvi) the faculty of ideation (manindriyam) > (xvii) the faculty of gladness (somanassondriyam) > (xviii) the faculty of life (jivitindriyam) > (xix) right views (samma-ditthi) > (xx) right intention (samma-sankappo) > (xxi) right endeavour (samma-vayamo) > (xxii) right mindfulness (sammasati) > (xxiii) right concentration (sammasamadhi) > (xxiv) the power of faith (saddhabalam) > (xxv) the power of energy (viriyabalam) > (xxvi) the power of mindfulness (satibalam) > (xxvii) the power of concentration (samadhibalam) > (xxviii) the power of insight (pannabalam) > (xxix) the power of conscientiousness (hiribalam) > (xxx) the power of the fear of blame (ottappabalam) > (xxxi) absence of greed (alobho) > (xxxii) absence of hate (adoso) > (xxxiii) absence of dullness (amoho) > (xxxiv) absence of covetousness (anabhijjha) > (xxxv) absence of malice (avyapado) > (xxxvi) right views (sammaditthi) > (xxxvii) conscientiousness (hiri) > (xxxviii) fear of blame (ottappam) > (xxxix) serenity in mind (cittapassaddhi) > (xl) serenity of mental factors (kayapassaddhi) > (xli) lightness in mind (cittalahuta) > (xlii) lightness in mental factors (kayalahuta) > (xliii) plasticity in mind (cittamuduta) > (xliv) plasticity in mental factors (kayamuduta) > (xlv) facility in mind (cittakammannata) > (xlvi) facility in mental factors (kayakammannata) > (xlvii) fitness in mind (cittapugunnata) > (xlviii) fitness in mental factors (kayapagunnata) > (xlix) directness in mind (cittujjukata) > (l) directness in mental factors (kayujjukata) > (li) mindfulness (sati) > (lii) intelligence (sampajannam) > (liii) quiet (samatho) > (liv) intuition (vipassana) > (lv) grasp (paggaho) > (lvi) balance (avikkhepo) > > Now these – or whatever other incorporeal, causally induced dhammas > there are on that occasion – these are the dhammas that are good. > > > > Let us consider this list of dhammas and see if it makes sense to > interpret this list as a list of "ultimate realities". > > If the author of the Dhammasangani had really intended to be > listing "ultimate realities" in an ontological sense, does it make > sense that he would list as seven separate dhammas: > - faculty of insight (xv - pannindriyam) > - right views (xix - samma-ditthi) > - power of insight (xxviii - pannabalam) > - absence of dullness (xxxiii - amoho) > - a second aspect of right views (xxxvi - samma-ditthi) > - intelligence (lii – sampajannam) > - intuition (liv – vipassana) > > The author then goes on to say that these seven dhammas are really > the same thing (what Acariya Anuruddha calls "panna"). > > As you know, this is but one example of repetition in the list. To > me, this indicates that "dhamma" does not mean "ultimate reality" > when used in this context. > > The fact that in the Suttas, the Buddha made only one ontological > statement (thanks for locating SNXXII.94 for me), suggests to me > that we should not try to turn "dhammas" into "ultimate realities". > > I am becoming convinced that Acariya Anuruddha used an ontological > approach as a tool to summarize the vast literature of the > Abhidhamma and that we should not take this ontological focus > literally as it is not supported in the primary texts. > > With tongue firmly in cheek, perhaps I should suggest to the > moderators that they change the description of DSG from "...with the > aim of developing precise understanding of the realities of the > present moment." into "...with the aim of developing precise > understanding of the dhammas of the present moment." :-) :-) > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > > ============================ Rob, I don't see that you have really made your intended point here. The original big list of dhammas certainly includes only items that the commentarial tradition refers to as paramattha dhammas. And I don't understand why repetitions using alternative names suggests that 'dhamma' here doesn't mean "paramattha dhamma". There are, indeed, places in the suttas where the Buddha uses the term 'dhamma' to mean the informal, conventional "thing", and such examples could make your case, but I don't see this example as doing so. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39456 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 11:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Tipitakadharas of Myanmar Dear Anthony, Hugo, Suan, Htoo, op 06-12-2004 02:09 schreef antony272b2 op antony272b@h...: > "In undertaking the assignments, the Venerable Sayadaw did not just > read > through the texts with the committee but sought out the different > versions, brought out the reference in the Commentaries and > Sub-commentaries,... > http://www.aimwell.org/Books/Library/Suttas/Paritta/BioMingun/biomingu > n.html N: I am so delighted, this bolsters the confidence in the purity of the texts. I went to the website you gave: excellent. Many thanks for this. I also read on the w.site Jim gave about the examination taking five years! Indeed the hardest one in the world. I am most impressed. And they recite not automatically, they have to understand the texts. It is true, when you understand something you can remember it. Hugo, you were pointing to a print mistake in the Bible (hombra and hombre!), but for the Tipitaka and Co no worry! Tell me what you find of those websites. And the recitation in this way is a long uninterrupted tradition. Suan once spoke about this. Perhaps Suan and Htoo would be willing to relate more first hand experiences, I shall be thankful and delighted to hear more. Some people find that there are contrarieties in Abhidhamma and sutta, and also in the Commentaries. Often things seem a contradiction, but in fact there are always different aspects and headings (sisa) according to which texts are arranged. In my study I meet such cases more often. Nina. 39457 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 11:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Dear Rob M, op 06-12-2004 01:59 schreef robmoult op rob.moult@j...: > Did the Buddha ever contrast "dhamma" (meaning reality or name of > reality) with "non-dhamma" (meanining non-reality or name of non- > reality)? > > In other words, did the primary texts make ontological statements > (other than SNXXII.94)? N: In a Jataka dhamma is what is right, adhamma is what is wrong, but this is not the question now. I shy away from the word ontological. Too abstract for me. I would rather approach the whole matter in a practical way. Dhamma or Dhaatu actually have the meaning of impersonal element devoid of self. I am interested in what dhamma is. I take to the suttas in M.N. about elements. When we understand what dhamma is we can also come to understand what is not dhamma but what we wrongly take for dhamma or reality. I am disinclined to reason in this way: this is reality, this is a concept. The danger of logics is that it does not help people to understand that there is no one in the seeing, that seeing is not me, lobha is not me. Moreover, it does not matter what word we use to denote what is real: dhamma, paramattha dhamma, dhatu, it does not matter. I find it helpful what the Burmese Abhidhamma teacher Thein Nyun said in his preface to the > DhatuKathu: as quoted by Rob K "Because the > functions of the elements give rise to the concepts of > continuity, collection and form, the ideas arise: > 1)the initial effort that has to be exerted when a > deed is about to be performed and 2) the care that has > to be taken while the deed is being performed to its > completion and this leads to the subsequent ideas > 3)"I can perform" and 4) "I can feel". Thus these four > imaginary characteristic functions of being have > bought about a deep-rooted belief in their existence. > But the elements have not the time or span of duration > to carry out such functions" . Nina. 39458 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 11:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: evolution. Hi TG, Your definition is also good. Actually, the teachings cannot be compared to any other branch of science. Nina. op 05-12-2004 23:09 schreef TGrand458@a... op TGrand458@a...: > > This is the first definition of science from the Random House College > Dictionary... > > "a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths > systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws." 39459 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 11:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Dear Mike, op 05-12-2004 23:51 schreef m. nease op mlnease@z...: > Nibbaana arises for only one moment, I think (when 'it' would naturally be > 'marked' by sa~n~naa as that is one of sa~n~naa's functions)--I don't see > why the reviewing after nibbaana might not take a concept (the memory of > nibbaana?) as an object--but I really don't know. N: I think this is what Sarah and I discussed: not so classifiable object: navattabbamaarama.na. Thus, we cannot say it is a concept, it is reality, but reviewed afterwards by kaamaavacara citta with pañña, not directly experienced by lokuttara citta. I should verify this with Sarah. Nina. 39460 From: nina Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 11:00am Subject: Vis. XIV, 121 and Tiika Vis. XIV, 121 and Tiika Ch. XIV, 121. (l) Next to determining, if the visible datum, etc., as object is vivid,[49] then six or seven 'impulsions' impel with respect to the objective fields as determined. Note 49 taken from the Tiika:. ' "If ... vivid (lit. large)": this is said because it is the occurrence of consciousness at the end of the impulsions that is being discussed. For an object is here intended as "vivid" when its life is fourteen conscious moments; and that should be understood as coming into focus when it has arisen and is two or three moments past' (Pm. 479). N: mahanta: great or vivid. When the object is vivid, the ruupa which is the object impinging on the sense organ came into focus after it had already arisen and was present for the duration of two or three moments of citta. Ruupa lasts, compared to the duration of citta, seventeen moments of citta. Thus, in this case, it falls away after the last javana-citta. There is no opportunity for the two moments of retention after the javana-cittas (see next pasa: Vis. XIV, 122). We read: six or seven 'impulsions'. The Tiika adds: or five javana-cittas, and this is the case when one is asleep or one has fainted. N: Also before dying there are five javana-cittas. Text Vis.: These are one among (1)-(8) the eight kinds of sense-sphere profitable, or (22)-(33) the twelve kinds of unprofitable, or (72)-(80) the nine remaining sense-sphere functional. This, firstly, is the way in the case of the five doors. N: They are eight mahaa-kusala cittas, twelve akusala cittas, eight mahaa-kiriyacittas and one ahetuka kiriyacitta that is the smile-producing citta of the arahat. Thus, these are twentynine kaamaavacara cittas performing the function of javana, the Tiika adds. Text Vis: But in the case of the mind door those same [impulsions arise] next to (71) mind-door adverting. Beyond [the stage of] change-of-lineage [50] any [of the following 26 kinds of impulsion] that obtains a condition [51] impels; Note 50, taken from the Tiika: . 'This includes also the preliminary-work and the cleansing (see Ch. XXII, note 7), not change-of-lineage only' (Pm. 479). See also Ch.IV,74 and Ch. XXI,129. N: After the citta which is change-of-lineage, gotrabhuu, arises in a mind-door process, cittas of another plane of citta arise: ruupa-jhaanacitta, aruupa-jhaanacitta or lokuttara citta. As to the preliminary-work and the cleansing (vodaana), these cittas arise before the change-of-lineage: parikamma or preparatory citta, upacaara or access and anuloma or adaptation which citta adapts to what preceded and to what follows. Note 51 taken from the Tiika: ' "That obtains a condition": any impulsion that has obtained a condition for arising next to change-of-lineage, as that of the fine-material sphere, an so on' (Pm. 479). Vis. Text: Vis. text: that is, any kind among (9)-(13) the five profitable, and (81)-(85) the five functional, of the fine-material sphere, and (14)-(17) the four profitable, and (86)-(89)the four functional of the immaterial sphere, and also (18)-(21) the four path consciousnesses and (66)-(69) four fruition consciousnesses of the supramundane. N: These are five ruupaavacara kusala cittas, five ruupaavacara kiriyacittas (of the arahat), four aruupaavacara kusala cittas, four aruupaavacara kiriyacittas, four magga-cittas and four phala-cittas. The four phala-cittas (fruition) are lokuttara vipaakacittas arising in the same process as the relevant magga-cittas and performing the function of javana. Thus, there are twentysix cittas other than the kaamaavacara cittas performing the function of javana. When we add these cittas to the twentynine kaamaavacara cittas performing the function of javana, there are fifty-five kinds of citta in all performing the function of javana. Vis. text: that is, any kind among (9)-(13) the five profitable, and (81)-(85) the five functional, of the fine-material sphere, and (14)-(17) the four profitable, and (86)-(89)the four functional of the immaterial sphere, and also (18)-(21) the four path consciousnesses and (66)-(69) four fruition consciousnesses of the supramundane. This is how the occurrence of the fifty-five kinds of profitable, unprofitable, functional, and resultant consciousness should be understood as impulsion. N: Remark: This passage reminds us that the order of cittas is fixed. Nobody can change the order of cittas, nor can any one cause a specific object to come into focus at a particular moment. When a sense object has already arisen for a few moments before it comes into focus, nobody can cause it to last longer than seventeen moments of citta. The function of citta is knowing an object and at the moment of javana the sobhana cetasikas or akusala, cetasikas which accompany it (in the case of non-arahats) cause the citta to be kusala or akusala. ****** Nina. 39461 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 11:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] 3 stages of sati/Nina. Hi Larry, I dig out some Tiika texts as best as I can. You know, I recently did this in my answer to you, but did not keep my mail. op 05-12-2004 18:55 schreef Larry op LBIDD@w...: > In Vism.XIV,3 Buddhaghosa talks about the three modes of knowing: > perception, consciousness, and wisdom. > He says perception knows sense consciousness but doesn't know the > general characteristics. N: Perception knows an object as blue, yellow, it does not say sense-consciousness. Consciousness knows sense consciousness and > the general characteristics but can't bring about the manifestation > of the path. Wisdom knows sense consciousness, the general > characteristics and can bring about "by endeavouring" the > manifestation of the path. In Vism.XIV,7 he seems to be saying this > knowing of wisdom is chiefly a matter of knowing the particular > characteristics of objects (sabhava). N. Texts: And the "penetration of characteristics", is stated with reference to merely making the characteristics the object, not to penetrating (the characteristics). Remarks: Thus in this context penetration of characteristics is not direct realization of the truth by pañña. In the Visuddhimagga I see the definition of pativedha as: penetration for the four noble Truths. The penetration of nibbana, the cessation of dukkha is accomplished at the moment of enlightenment. However, this is a long process. First the three general characteristics have to be realized again and again. Before the three general characteristics can be realized, pañña has to know by insight the particular characteristics of nama and rupa. Tiika: N: who is concentrated knows things as they really are, this was discussed in India: when stages of insight are reached the characteristics of nama and rupa appear vlearly, one at a time, and at that moment there is also concentration on the object that appears, and this has become stronger. L: This analysis doesn't exactly seem like a discrimination between > delusion and understanding and the knowing of consciousness seems > hard to categorize. N: It is also said in the Tiika that citta without pañña can, because of prior study have the characteristics as object but it does not penetrate the true nature of nama and rupa. L: I was wondering, since perception (sa~n~naa) is > the proximate cause of sati, if this might be a "stages of the path" > scheme in three stages. N: This is another degree of sañña, it does not fit into this simile. I clarify: when considering sañña cetasika it is different all the time, depending on the citta it accompanies. It shares the same object with the citta, the object can be a reality, dhamma, or an idea or concept. When sañña accompanies lokuttara citta its object is nibbana, not a concept. Sa~n~naa as the proximate cause of sati: I see it this way: when you listen intently, you can have firm remembrance of what you heard, but there is also understanding of what you hear, otherwise you could not remember it. In that way sañña can be the proximate cause of sati. L: First there is identifying the object without > proliferation. Then there is the _conventional_ understanding of the > object as impermanent, unsatisfactory, and not self, i.e., body, > breath, etc. is impermanent, unsatisfactory, not self. N: I think that is too soon. When following the stages of insight we see: know nama as nama and rupa as rupa. After that: seeing them as conditioned realities. Their arising and falling away comes later on. L: Then there is > the penetration of conventional identity to the experience of nama > and rupa as impermanent, unsatisfactory, and not self. > Is this a reasonable explanation of what is meant by the knowing of > consciousness here? N: The text has:< For insight also comes to increase with the consciousness dissociated from knowledge by the influence of (repeated) practice owing to the skilful nature of the insight (having characteristics as object) occurring after having repeatedly penetrated the characteristics many times..> The knowing of consciousness in the simile: it is not pañña that brings about the manifestation of the Path, it is not pativedha, realization of the truth. Thus, the simile just wants to show that there are different ways of knowing and that pañña is specific, it brings about the manifestation of the Path. It is just a simile not more than that. Nina. 39462 From: Bhante Vimalaramsi Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 10:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Value of discussion (was evil thoughts) Dhamma Greetings Sarah, So your stance is that it is unwholesome to pull up wholesome thoughts because that desire is unwholesome? What is the sense of that? Where is right effort as described in the suttas in this. If you will remember I took a long time explaining what the Satipatthana Sutta said about the hindrances and to be honest in practical terms that is the way it works. The ideas you present seem to have a very pessimistic tone to them. Is this what the Buddha actually taught? Why try and make things better and see for yourself whether this leads to an uplifted mind. An uplifted mind that has pleasant feeling in it, is not a bad thing! (please take a look at the post I just sent to Phil) Why? Because with an uplifted mind one can clearly see how mind works. On the night of the Bobdhisatta's enlightenment, he had a major insight and that was pleasant feeling is not a bad thing to have arise. The Bodhisatta had done many austerities to stop pleasant feeling from arising. But his insight was that pleasant feeling and painful feeling were two sides of the same coin. The attachment to either one of these states was from the idea that these states (lobha and dosa) were his personally. But feeling is only feeling and when one sees this through the eyes of conditionality and dependent origination it is just an impersonal process. No matter whether the feeling is pleasant or painful, when one sees this through the eyes of dependent origination they are exactly the same. The idea that the only way to see anything is by having wisdom arise by itself. But this isn't necessarily so, it does take effort and strong mindfulness. What you are describing is a let it be attitude and hope that wisdom takes over, just seems to go far away from the Buddha's teachings (in reality). Your whole idea about chanda is not correct according to my teacher Sayadaw U Silananda who by the way is a bhikkhu of 60 years standing in the sangha and is a famous abhidhamma scholar. So I'll take his definitions, if you don't mind. I lived with him as his attendant for 2 years, and was told over and over that chanda is a wholesome desire, period. The saying that chanda can be unwholesome isn't correct according to him. I did ask about this many times, and was always told the same thing. "Chanda is a wholesome desire that leads one's mind to the goal of liberation." There seems to be a lot of worry and fear involved on this group about with whether something is brought up or not and the use of the word pan~n~a seems to the catch-all phrase that still changes depending on the situation. Too much theory without direct practice is the cause of this. I've never run across so many people who think that it will take countless lifetimes to experience the Dhamma that the Buddha teaches. This shows the sad state of the Buddha Dhamma these days. I have run across bhikkhus who tell people that meditation is a waste of time because there can be no benefit. But this doesn't make it so! It is time to go back to the basics as taught in the suttas and vinaya and actually practice in the way that the Buddha prescribed, rather than get caught in intellectual webs of theorizing. As the Buddha told Venerable Ananda in sutta #106, section 15: "What should be done for his disciples out of compassion by a teacher who seeks their welfare and has compassion for them, that I have done for you, Ananda. There are these roots of trees, these empty huts. Meditate, Ananda, do not delay, or else you will regret it later. This is our instruction to you." Maha-Metta always Bhante Vimalaramsi 39463 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 1:11pm Subject: Re: AN III - 100 mental misconduct vs. thoughts of ill-will --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, James (and Sarah) - Geez, I just have to say this: I was so pleased at Sarah's post that > expressed the *possibility* of acting, taking steps, directing the mind, and > accomplishing, and that urged the doing of this. It was just the opposite of the > sort of expression of helplessness and hopelessness that I've criticized > elsewhere (with great approbation and acclamation ... NOT!! ;-). And here, James, > I find you, a fellow promoter of kusala and active cetana, engaging in > nay-saying! Friend Howard, Hehehe…are you afraid I switched sides or something? ;-)) No, I think you have misinterpreted the conversation between Sarah and me. As I see it, Sarah wasn't advocating, as you write, "acting, taking steps, directing the mind, and accomplishing, and that urged the doing of this". Wow, it would be a cold day in hell before that happened! ;-)). Sarah was simply stating that one should see the defilements with wisdom (panna) as they arise, with no special effort or goal, and that doing that will slowly get rid of them. I argued that wisdom is too weak, because of ignorance, to do the whole job alone. I stated that the Buddha taught Sila, Samadhi, and Panna to purify the mind. They each condition each other and build on each other to rid the mind of defilements. I don't think I am `nay saying', I believe in the benefit of practice; but Howard, I am probably more `anti-intellectualism' than you are. I don't believe that too many people, especially at this point in the Buddha Sasana, can just "think" themselves to enlightenment. At the Buddha's time there were those with `little dust in their eyes' for which this approach could work, but nowadays we have entire mountains in our eyes! ;-)) Does this mean we should give up? No, it just means we have to try harder! Metta, James 39464 From: Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 8:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: AN III - 100 mental misconduct vs. thoughts of ill-will Hi, James - In a message dated 12/6/04 4:13:09 PM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > I don't think I > am `nay saying', I believe in the benefit of practice; but Howard, I > am probably more `anti-intellectualism' than you are. > ---------------------------------- Howard: Maybe. I'm not "anti-intellectualism," though I do see limits to the useful fallout from intellectualizing. ---------------------------------- I don't > > believe that too many people, especially at this point in the Buddha > Sasana, can just "think" themselves to enlightenment. > ------------------------------------- Howard: I don't think anyone ever could, though I do think that directed thought and outright willful determination will work at times. Typically, however, our efforts need to be applied at an early point in the conditioning process, directly cultivating conditions that lead to further conditions, like a line of tipping dominoes, until, eventually, final goals are achieved. ------------------------------------ At the > > Buddha's time there were those with `little dust in their eyes' for > which this approach could work, but nowadays we have entire > mountains in our eyes! ;-)) Does this mean we should give up? No, > it just means we have to try harder! > ------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, more consistency to our efforts. ==================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39465 From: gy_richard Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 1:11pm Subject: Greetings, new member here. Hello, I bow down to all who take part in this group; may you all be well, happy, and free. Just wanted to introduce myself,(as suggested). My name is Guy and I live in a big bowl of samsara in southern USA. I have been reading and trying to practice Buddhism on and off for about 20 years now. I have done a lot of reading, and I admit very little practice, but I think my motivation is finally set to sit on a daily basis. I started out reading Trungpa Rinpoche, then read some Zen for a while then in to Tibetan Buddhism, studying the first 3 courses of the Asain Classics correspondence courses from Geishe Michael Roach. I found this course to be very good and helpful. But of course, my Karma at that point was still not ripe enough to allow me to stick to one thing so I continued my search, sat with a Vajrayana group for a short time, then moved back home where I am today, and where I find myself to be the lone Buddhist from what I see so far. In the last 8 months or so I have become very interested in the Theravada tradition, and feel more of a sense of "time to settle in and do the work". I sometimes think about where my mind would be today if I would have stuck to meditation from the start all those years ago, and do not want to look back on the second have of my life in the same way. So... I do not pretend to have a vast wealth of knowledge about the Buddha's teachings and will no doubt benefit more from this group more than you will from me, but, if I have one piece of advice for anyone it is this...if you are the type, like me, who fell in love with the Dhamma and loves to read, but you find yourself putting off the actual practice of sitting meditation, don't put it off any longer!! Study without practice, in my opinion, is not Buddhism or being a Buddhist. So put the books down for a while and sit! Besides, what's the point of knowing the teachings if we don't put them in to practice right? Okay, I've yapped enough. Thank you for being here. Metta, Guy 39466 From: kenhowardau Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 2:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Rob and Robert, Rob M wrote to Robert K, ----------------------------- > In your message above, you wrote, "I think seeing what is reality (dhamma) and what is not is stressed throughout the teachings." If you had written, "I think seeing what are dhammas is stressed throughout the teachings.", then I would have agreed with you 100%. However, you have made it into an ontological statement which I do not think finds any support in the texts. > ------------------------------ This reminds me of a conversation I had with Robert in the bar of Noosa hotel. ( :-) He was drinking mineral water, and I was drinking coffee.) It has become a, "Where were you when you heard JFK was shot?" type of situation. In this case it was, "Where you when you heard that wrong view was disbelief in kamma and vipaka?" Previously, I had assumed that belief in self was the greatest (most fundamental) wrong view. But now it all began to fall into place, and I thought, "Ah, so that's why the Great Forty Sutta describes wrong view that way!" If there is kamma and vipaka, then concepts cannot be real. Consider, for example, a beautiful ripe peach: Peaches are delicious, nutritious food, and so, if they are real, having one must be the result of some past good kamma. In other words, if a peach is real then it is an inherently desirable object. But what if that same peach becomes stuck in my throat and I suffer physical pain? Then, it must be inherently undesirable and my experiencing of it is the result of past bad kamma. But that is ridiculous - it can't be both inherently desirable and inherently undesirable! The whole theory of kamma and vipaka becomes nonsensical if concepts are real. So, don't worry that the Buddha didn't constantly point out that he was talking about paramattha dhammas, not concepts. That was established from the beginning - as the basis. Any inference that concepts were real would have contradicted - and made a mockery of - his entire teaching. Ken H 39467 From: m. nease Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 2:47pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" [Sukin] Hi Howard, ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 10:07 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" [Sukin] > > Hi, Mike - > > In a message dated 12/6/04 10:44:10 AM Eastern Standard Time, > mlnease@z... writes: > >> Thanks for this clarification--so phassa and vedanaa are 'infected'? > =================== > Yes. As I see it, for a worldling - for any non-arahant, for that > matter - phassa is the contact of an apparent subject with an apparent > object > through a connecting sense-door, and vedana is "I like" or "I dislike" or > "I am > neutral about". Neither is uninfected. Really! Interesting interpretations of both, I'll give them some thought. mike 39468 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 3:04pm Subject: Re: Greetings, new member here. Hi Guy, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "gy_richard" wrote: > I bow down to all who take part in this group; may you all be well, > happy, and free. > > Just wanted to introduce myself,(as suggested). My name is Guy and I > live in a big bowl of samsara in southern USA. I have been reading > and trying to practice Buddhism on and off for about 20 years now. I > have done a lot of reading, and I admit very little practice, but I > think my motivation is finally set to sit on a daily basis. > > I started out reading Trungpa Rinpoche, then read some Zen for a > while then in to Tibetan Buddhism, studying the first 3 courses of > the Asain Classics correspondence courses from Geishe Michael Roach. > I found this course to be very good and helpful. But of course, my > Karma at that point was still not ripe enough to allow me to stick to > one thing so I continued my search, sat with a Vajrayana group for a > short time, then moved back home where I am today, and where I find > myself to be the lone Buddhist from what I see so far. > > In the last 8 months or so I have become very interested in the > Theravada tradition, and feel more of a sense of "time to settle in > and do the work". I sometimes think about where my mind would be > today if I would have stuck to meditation from the start all those > years ago, and do not want to look back on the second have of my life > in the same way. > > So... I do not pretend to have a vast wealth of knowledge about the > Buddha's teachings and will no doubt benefit more from this group > more than you will from me, but, if I have one piece of advice for > anyone it is this...if you are the type, like me, who fell in love > with the Dhamma and loves to read, but you find yourself putting off > the actual practice of sitting meditation, don't put it off any > longer!! Study without practice, in my opinion, is not Buddhism or > being a Buddhist. So put the books down for a while and sit! Besides, > what's the point of knowing the teachings if we don't put them in to > practice right? > > Okay, I've yapped enough. Thank you for being here. ===== Welcome to DSG! Nice introduction. Really looking forward to your contributions! Some people contribute by being full of good answers (there are a LOT of really well-read people on DSG). Other people contribute by asking questions. Feel free to get involved in an existing thread or, even better, feel free to start a new thread with your own questions. Metta, Rob M :-) 39469 From: Andrew Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 3:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: [snip] > The full understanding of the known means to analyze the object into > constituent 'dhammas' and delimit the specific characteristic, > function, manifestation and proximate cause of each dhamma. This > process allows one to overcome the delusion of substantial unities. > In other words, all things are made up of impersonal components > brought together by conditions. Please note that in this series of > messages, I am not rejecting the value of breaking things into > constituent dhammas, I am only rejecting the value of attributing an > ontological "reality" to these dhammas. > > The full understanding of scrutinization involves seeing the three > characterisitic (impermanence, suffering and non-self) to overcome > the delusion of permanance, pleasurable and self. > > At the stage of the full understanding of abandoning, desire and > lust of objects is eliminated. > > ===== > > > > > I don't know for sure if this is a fair question to pose to you, > but > > I'll post it anyway with apologies in advance! (-: > > ===== > > I hope that I answered your questions. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) Hi Rob M Thanks for your detailed answers. I have printed them out and will ponder. Like Mike, I am looking forward to working out where all this is leading. Best wishes Andrew 39470 From: Bhante Vimalaramsi Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 2:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhante and Smiling & Htoo's account of smiling cittas Dhamma Greetings Hugo, You make me laugh with all of your "I" 's bee-bopping around............Keep up the fun work! Maha-Metta always Bhante Vimalaramsi 39471 From: Andrew Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 3:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Value of discussion (was evil thoughts) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Hugo wrote: > Hello Andrew, > > On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 08:35:38 -0000, Andrew wrote: > > Do you think it is possible to directly know something and later call > > it to mind such that you can say "back then, I had a moment when I > > directly knew such-and-such"? > > I am not sure what you meant, I read it once, prepared a reply, then > read it again and my reply didn't make sense to my second > interpretation. > > > This isn't a trick debating question. Don't answer it if you don't > > feel like it. Anyone else who would like to chime in, please do so. > > FYI I have a feeling that we worldlings can't recall any moments of > > direct knowing. But I could be wrong ... > > mmm....maybe I see what you mean, I don't know, but I think that if > you know something you don't need to recall it, it is there. > > Like some teachers told us at school, the exam should be finished > promptly, if you know it, you know it, you don't have to sit the whole > hour trying to remember it. > > > Does my reply makes sense to your question? > > Greetings, > -- > Hugo Hi Hugo Thanks for your example but I have to be honest and say that it didn't click with me. I suppose the basic issue is, if we can't remember direct knowing, how can we say "when I meditate every morning I directly know anatta/anicca etc"? We *think* we do ... but is that wisdom or ignorance, actuality or conceit? All the blind men thought they knew what an elephant was ... Bhikkhu Bodhi has pointed out that most of the wrong views discussed by the Buddha in the Brahmajala Sutta arise, not after intellectualising and book- learning, but after intense meditations. Huh? How can that be for those who shun Dhamma study and believe that meditation is directly knowing the mind? (I'm not talking about you or anyone else - I, in fact, used to believe this many years ago). Anyway, we all do as we do and may we all do it with patience. Best wishes Andrew 39472 From: Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 4:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Rob: "I agree that concept (pannatti) is found in the Patthana (one of the conditioning states for pakatupanissaya) but I don't read this as being an ontological statement (reality vs. non-reality). Similarly, I don't think that pannatti is used in an ontological fashion in the Visuddhimagga or its commentary (correct me if I am wrong here)." Hi Rob, I thought the explanation of pannatti in Abhidhammattasangaha came from another book in ab. pitaka about different types of people. Sorry, I don't remember the name. In Vism. there is a lot of discrimination of dhammas with and without sabhava (particular characteristic) and there are a few instances of the use of "paramattha" mostly from the Mahatika which is dated no later than 7th cent. Larry 39473 From: Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 11:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Value of discussion (was evil thoughts) Hi, Andrew (and Hugo) - In a message dated 12/6/04 6:39:42 PM Eastern Standard Time, athel60@t... writes: > Hi Hugo > > Thanks for your example but I have to be honest and say that it > didn't click with me. I suppose the basic issue is, if we can't > remember direct knowing, how can we say "when I meditate every > morning I directly know anatta/anicca etc"? We *think* we do ... but > is that wisdom or ignorance, actuality or conceit? All the blind men > thought they knew what an elephant was ... Bhikkhu Bodhi has pointed > out that most of the wrong views discussed by the Buddha in the > Brahmajala Sutta arise, not after intellectualising and book- > learning, but after intense meditations. Huh? How can that be for > those who shun Dhamma study and believe that meditation is directly > knowing the mind? (I'm not talking about you or anyone else - I, in > fact, used to believe this many years ago). > > Anyway, we all do as we do and may we all do it with patience. > > Best wishes > Andrew > > ======================== This makes my mind return to the concept vs reality business, Andrew. I just couldn't suppress a smile at your bringing up the elephant example! The blind man feeling a leg said the elephant is like a tree. The one feeling the trunk said it was like a snake (I seem to recall). What is the lesson one might take from this? Someone feels a pine tree, senses hardness, and says the tree is hardness. Someone else smells the pine needles and says the tree is sharp odor. Hmm, perhaps these are partial views, none of which separately or even taken together, constitutes the nature of the pinetree? ;-)) Sometimes the synthesis of concept formation adds to one's knowledge by not ignoring the network of relations. While I'm "talking trees", often *we just don't see the forest for the trees* - to turn a common saying on its head! With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39474 From: Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 0:12pm Subject: Blind Men & the Elephant Hi, all - The following is the Blind Men & Elephant story from the Udana. This translation is from the web site http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/udn/udn6.htm. I find it a good lesson about seeing only separate pieces of a puzzle and about disputation. With metta, Howard -------------------------------------- Thus have I heard. On a certain occasion, the Blessed One dwelt at Savatthi, in the Jetavana, the garden of Anâthapindika. Now at that time a large number of Samanas, Brahmanas and wandering monks of various heretical sects, holding a variety of views, doubters on many points, having many diverse aspirations, and recourse to that which relates to various heresies, entered Savatthi for alms. Some of these Samanas and Brahmanas held that the world is eternal and contended that this view was true and every other false. Some said: the world is not eternal. Some said: the world is finite. Some said: the world is infinite. Some said: the soul and the body are identical. Some said: the soul and the body are not identical. Some said: the Perfect One continues to exist after death. Some said: The Perfect One does not continue to exist after death. Some said: The Perfect One exists and does not exist after death. Some said: The Perfect One neither exists nor does not exist after death. Each contending their view was true and every other false. These quarrelsome, pugnacious, cavilling monks wounded one another with sharp words (lit. mouth-javelins) declaiming: "such is the truth, such is not the truth: the truth is not such, such is the truth." And a number of Bhikkhus, robing themselves in the forenoon and taking their alms-bowls and tunics, entered Savatthi for alms and when they had returned from their rounds and finished their meal, they went to where the Blessed One was and drawing near, they saluted the Blessed One and sat down apart, and while thus sitting they said to the Blessed One: "Just now, Sire, a large number of Samanas and Brahmanas and wandering monks holding varions heresies entered Savatthi for alms, and they are disputing among themselves, saying: "'This is the truth, such is not the truth etc. [as above. Transl.]" "These heretical monks, O Bhikkhus, are blind, eyeless, they know not what is right, they know not what is wrong, they know not what is true, they know not what is false. These monks not perceiving what is right, not perceiving what is wrong, not perceiving what is true, not perceiving what is false, become disputations, saying: 'such is the truth, such is not the truth' etc. [as above. Transl.] In former times, O Bhikkhus, there was a King in this town of Savatthi. And the King, O Bhikkhus, called a man to him and said: "Go, thou, and collect all the men born blind in Savatthi and bring them here." "Be it so, Lord" said that man in assent to the King and he went to Savatthi and he brought all the men born blind in Savatthi to where the King was and drawing near he said to the King: "Lord, all the men blind from their birth in Savatthi are present." "Pray, then, bring an elephant before them." "Be it so, Lord" said that man in assent to the King and he brought an elephant into the presence of the blind men and said: "This, O blind men, is an elephant." To some of the blind men he presented the head of the elephant, saying, 'Such, O blind men, is an elephant.' To some he presented the body, saying: 'such is an elephant.' To some he presented the feet, saying: 'Such is an elephant.' To some he presented the back, saying: 'Such is an elephant.' To some he presented the tail, saying: 'Such is an elephant.' To some he presented the hairy tuft of the tail, saying: 'Such is an elephant.' The show-man, O Bhikkhus, having presented the elephant to these blind ones, went to where the King was and drawing near said to the King: "The elephant, Lord, has been brought before the blind men, do now as seems fit." And the King went to where the blind men were, and drawing near said to them: "Do you now know what an elephant is like?" "Assuredly, Lord: we now know what an elephant is like." "Tell me then, O blind men, what an elephant is like." And those blind men, O Bhikkhus, who had felt the head of the elephant, said: 'An elephant, Sir, is like a large round jar . Those who had felt its ears, said: 'it is like a winnowing basket.' Those who had felt its tusks, said: 'it is like a plough-share.' Those who had felt its trunk, said: 'it is like a plough.' Those who had felt its body, said: 'it is like a granary: Those who had felt its feet, said: 'it is like a pillar.' Those who had felt its back, said: 'it is like a mortar.' Those who had felt its tail, said: 'it is a like a pestle.' Those who had felt the tuft of its tail, said: 'it is like a broom.' And they all fought amongst themselves with their fists, declaring, 'such is an elephant, such is not elephant, an elephant is not like that, it is like this.' And the King, O Bhikkhus, was highly delighted. In exactly the same way, O Bhikkhus, do these heretical people, blind and without insight, dispute among themselves saying 'this doctrine is true, every other is false'." And the Blessed One in this connection, on that occasion, breathed forth this solemn utterance: "Well is it known that some Samanas and Brahmanas, Who attach themselves to methods of analysis, And perceiving only one side of a case, Disagree with one another." /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39475 From: Ken O Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 5:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Ken H > In other words, if a peach is real then it is an inherently > desirable object. But what if that same peach becomes stuck in my > throat and I suffer physical pain? Then, it must be inherently > undesirable and my experiencing of it is the result of past bad > kamma. But that is ridiculous - it can't be both inherently > desirable and inherently undesirable! The whole theory of kamma and vipaka becomes nonsensical if concepts are real. k: Yes, I think this is good :). Some pple like apple and some dont. It is pleasant and unpleasant to different people, so what is real, the pleasant and unpleasant or the apple :) Ken O 39476 From: Ken O Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 5:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Giving a Smile Hi Friend James Renunication does not mean you shave your head and become a bhikkhu, Renunication means abandonment, relinquishment. It cannot happen without alobha. Dana cannot be possible without alobha, without relinquishement, without non-attachment Under the A Treatise of the Paramis, you can see it in abhidhamma.org <> Buddha has been perfecting it during his bodhisatta time for aeons and yet people say it cannot be found in 8NP :) Let me tell you another little secret, all the paramis can be found in the 8NP but only a Buddha would perfect all of them :). Ken O p.s. also the point of renunication << Renunciation has the characteristic of departing from sense pleasures and existence; its function is to verify their unsatisfactoriness; its manifestation is the withdrawal from them; a sense of spiritual urgency (samvega) is its proximate cause.>> 39477 From: m. nease Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 5:33pm Subject: Di.t.thijukamma, was Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi Nina, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nina van Gorkom" To: Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 11:00 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Dear Mike, op 05-12-2004 23:51 schreef m. nease op mlnease@z...: > Nibbaana arises for only one moment, I think (when 'it' would naturally be > 'marked' by sa~n~naa as that is one of sa~n~naa's functions)--I don't see > why the reviewing after nibbaana might not take a concept (the memory of > nibbaana?) as an object--but I really don't know. N: I think this is what Sarah and I discussed: not so classifiable object: navattabbamaarama.na. Thus, we cannot say it is a concept, it is reality, but reviewed afterwards by kaamaavacara citta with pañña, not directly experienced by lokuttara citta. I should verify this with Sarah. Thanks Nina, interesting--this reminds me of something I read this morning with implications for 'conceptual right view(s)'. From Sumangala's commentary to the STA, Chapter 5, The Process Free, regarding the division of all kusala into daana, sila and bhaavanaa: "Making one's view straight by way of properly seeing, occurring as [the thought] 'There is a result of giving', etc., is called straightening of one's view. If this is the case, then the nature of the meritorious act of straightening one's view is not found in an arising of consciousness dissociated from knowledge. It is not right that it is not found, because the prior and subsequent volitions are included in each of the meritorious acts. Certainly there is only consciousness associated with knowledge at the time of straightening one's view, but prior to and subsequent to the event, consciousness dissociated from knowledge also arises, so the nature of the meritorious act of straightening one's view applies to this kind of consciousness too. There is no need for further elaboration... "Aacariya Dhammapala Thera states that teaching, listening and straightening one's view are included in cultivation because they constitute the repeated practice of wholesome dhammas. Others, however, argue that when one teaches and listens one does so employing knowledge consequent upon what one is teaching and repeatedly piercing through to the characteristics [of dhammas]; thus teaching and listening are included in cultivation because they bring acute insight.... "While straightening one's view [applies] everywhere, since its characteristic is to be relevant to them all {daana, sila and bhaavanaa}. For when some act of giving, and so forth, is purified by right view occurring as the thought 'there is a result of giving', it is of great fruit, of great benefit. It is in consideration of this that it is stated in the commentary to the Diigha Nikaaya that straightening one's view has the characteristic of being relevant to them all {daana, sila, bhaavanaa}." {Mine} mn Admittedly this is only eight hundred years old or so and isn't from the Nikaayas. Still I like it because it agrees with my (current) opinions... I first read about the kusala of di.t.thijjukamma some years ago in Khun Sujin's writing. I regret that it's taken me so long to look deeper into it, though it's always made sense to me. mike p.s. I believe when we were discussing 'conceptual right view' earlier, Sarah mentioned 'there is a result'. Thanks for the pointer, Sarah. 39478 From: m. nease Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 5:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Rob and Rob, ----- Original Message ----- From: "robmoult" To: Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 8:48 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts > With tongue firmly in cheek, perhaps I should suggest to the > moderators that they change the description of DSG from "...with the > aim of developing precise understanding of the realities of the > present moment." into "...with the aim of developing precise > understanding of the dhammas of the present moment." :-) :-) I agree with you both in my own dithering way. As I see it, the Dhamma is NOT about ontology--it is about dukkha and the end of dukkha. The only significance of the designation 'paramattha dhamma' in this context is that this, whatever it is, can be the basis of vipassanaa. That, to me, is the only distinction that makes any sense in the context of dukkha and the end of dukkha. We're not studying philosophy or physics here, are we? Why must the translation of one phrase by our brilliant teachers cause so much dissention? It simply isn't necessary if we take this question out of the context of philosophy, ontology, physics and so on--and place it within the context wherein it was born. I know you two both know this material FAR better than I do-- I vote in favor of RobM's proposal, tongue-in-cheek as it may be. mike 39479 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 5:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > ============================ > Rob, I don't see that you have really made your intended point here. > The original big list of dhammas certainly includes only items that the > commentarial tradition refers to as paramattha dhammas. And I don't understand why > repetitions using alternative names suggests that 'dhamma' here doesn't mean > "paramattha dhamma". There are, indeed, places in the suttas where the Buddha > uses the term 'dhamma' to mean the informal, conventional "thing", and such > examples could make your case, but I don't see this example as doing so. ===== My logic is as follows. I imagine that I am composing the Dhammasangani and I intend "dhamma" to mean "ultimate reality" in an ontological sense. I start the project by listing all the ultimate realities which are wholesome. If I am talking about ultimate realities, does it make sense that I would duplicate seven times the same ultimate reality but give it seven different names? I think not. The fact that the long list which opens the Dhammasangani contains many duplications, is evidence to me that the author did not consider the elements in this list to be "ultimate realities". Metta, Rob M :-) 39480 From: m. nease Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 6:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Giving a Smile Hi Ken, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ken O" To: Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 5:26 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Giving a Smile > thought of renunication that is thought of renunciation of sensual > pleasure. this is non-greed :) - generosity > > So say Buddha never taught generosity. It is a matter to look at it > more carefully. The more I look at references to renunciation, relinquishing and so on (in English translation) the more I find they have to do with, yes, daana, generosity--NOT 'letting go' of something unwholesome. Detachment? Alobha? All more closely related, in the Paali texts, to generosity than to any other concept or any other cetasika, as I read it. mike 39481 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 6:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Nina, Mike and Andrew (and all), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Rob M, > op 06-12-2004 01:59 schreef robmoult op rob.moult@j...: > > > Did the Buddha ever contrast "dhamma" (meaning reality or name of > > reality) with "non-dhamma" (meanining non-reality or name of non- > > reality)? > > > > In other words, did the primary texts make ontological statements > > (other than SNXXII.94)? > N: In a Jataka dhamma is what is right, adhamma is what is wrong, but this > is not the question now. > I shy away from the word ontological. Too abstract for me. I would rather > approach the whole matter in a practical way. Dhamma or Dhaatu actually have > the meaning of impersonal element devoid of self. I am interested in what > dhamma is. I take to the suttas in M.N. about elements. When we understand > what dhamma is we can also come to understand what is not dhamma but what we > wrongly take for dhamma or reality. I am disinclined to reason in this way: > this is reality, this is a concept. The danger of logics is that it does not > help people to understand that there is no one in the seeing, that seeing is > not me, lobha is not me. > Moreover, it does not matter what word we use to denote what is real: > dhamma, paramattha dhamma, dhatu, it does not matter. > I find it helpful what the Burmese Abhidhamma teacher Thein Nyun said in > his preface to the > > DhatuKathu: as quoted by Rob K > "Because the > > functions of the elements give rise to the concepts of > > continuity, collection and form, the ideas arise: > > 1)the initial effort that has to be exerted when a > > deed is about to be performed and 2) the care that has > > to be taken while the deed is being performed to its > > completion and this leads to the subsequent ideas > > 3)"I can perform" and 4) "I can feel". Thus these four > > imaginary characteristic functions of being have > > bought about a deep-rooted belief in their existence. > > But the elements have not the time or span of duration > > to carry out such functions" . ===== Nina, Well said! I could not agree more. Mike, Andrew and perhaps others have wondered where this is leading to. I would like to start putting some closure here. My position is... drum roll please :-) The primary texts talk of dhammas. Understanding dhammmas is very important. Except in a single instance (SNXXII.94), the Buddha did not enter into ontological discussions. I agree with you, Nina, when you wrote, "I am disinclined to reason in this way: this is reality, this is a concept." I feel that when we get into discussions of "this is reality, this is a concept", we are getting farther away from the Buddha's teaching and wasting a valuable opportunity when we could be straightening out our views based on what the Buddha actually taught. As a result, I will actively engage myself in discussions on dhammas but I will actively disengage myself from ontological type discussions on "realities" (especially "realities vs. concepts"). Metta, Rob M :-) 39482 From: Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 1:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi, Rob - In a message dated 12/6/04 8:59:19 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > My logic is as follows. I imagine that I am composing the > Dhammasangani and I intend "dhamma" to mean "ultimate reality" in an > ontological sense. I start the project by listing all the ultimate > realities which are wholesome. If I am talking about ultimate > realities, does it make sense that I would duplicate seven times the > same ultimate reality but give it seven different names? I think > not. The fact that the long list which opens the Dhammasangani > contains many duplications, is evidence to me that the author did > not consider the elements in this list to be "ultimate realities". > =================== Well, I just don't make the connection you do, Rob, nor do I infer the conclusion you do. But that's what makes DSG a good stew - a variety of ingredients! ;-) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39483 From: Ken O Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 6:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi RobM I concern about reality and I dont care whether it is ontological sense or not. Buddha did differentiate between concepts and reality. D.O is the difference that says what is reality, what can be directly known. Ultimate reality or whatever anyone like to call it, is a reality that can be directly known, it not so much what word we used, it is the essence that is important. Or we may be basing on the wrong initial basis of development. Five aggregates, 8NP, D.O are reality that can be directly known. Self is a mental construct which cannot be found in the conditions. It is always presents because of our underlying tendecies of the three roots that make us believe it is there. Our habitual inference to concepts that make us illusion to reality. An apple can taste pleasant or unpleasant, but in reality it is the tactile object and visible object that is directly known and not apple. It is the plesant and unplesant feelings in the javana process that make us dislike or crave the apple. It is not apple that make us crave, it is the feelings as a conseqence of the contact from sense object, sense base and sense citta that make us crave. It is important to note this fine difference because we may end up developing the wrong way. In fact, Acariya Anuruddha does not count sankhara as > an "ultimate reality", he counts sankhara as a collection > of "ultimate realities"; this is in spite of the fact that the > Buddha said that sankhara "exists". K: Are you talking about sankhara as in sankhara aggregates. In the Dhammasangi, it is reference as a collective and they realities and they exists. I think you should read the book by the author again because he did classify cetasikas (including in the sankhara) as paramatha dhammas > Abhidhammatthasangaha says that "sankhara" is a concept for a group of cetasikas with no separate existence. k: Could i known which book you are using and which page you are refering and in which context it is saying about. Different context, different explanation as what Nina has said. > Sorry Ken O, I may not have understood your last point. If you are > saying that the Buddha used the same term "comprehend" for > both "realities" and "concepts", then I agree that the Sutta does > not differentiate. K: Direct comprehend - in Abhidhamma context - my opinion is understanding reality. Planes can be different but aggregates are the same regardless what plane we dwell in. That is why Devas can understand what Buddha say because it can be directly known even though the concepts we have may be different. Remember I quote a few months ago, a tribal person may not known what is a tank, but the person can directly known the aggregates, he can feel pain or pleasure and he can be taught dhamma to be enlighted. These examples are to shown that reality can be directly known while conceps varies and not the gist to development of the path. Ken O 39484 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 6:54pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Ken H, In my most recent message (message 39481), I vowed not to enter into any more "this is reality, this is concept" ontological-type discussions. But I will invoke a grandfather clause (you posted this message before I formally stated my position), and reply to you (also because I genuinely enjoy our exchanges, Ken H). ===== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi Rob and Robert, > > Rob M wrote to Robert K, > ----------------------------- > > In your message above, you wrote, "I think seeing what is reality > (dhamma) and what is not is stressed throughout the teachings." If > you had written, "I think seeing what are dhammas is stressed > throughout the teachings.", then I would have agreed with you 100%. > However, you have made it into an ontological statement which I do > not think finds any support in the texts. > > ------------------------------ > > This reminds me of a conversation I had with Robert in the bar of > Noosa hotel. ( :-) He was drinking mineral water, and I was drinking > coffee.) It has become a, "Where were you when you heard JFK was > shot?" type of situation. In this case it was, "Where you when you > heard that wrong view was disbelief in kamma and vipaka?" > > Previously, I had assumed that belief in self was the greatest (most > fundamental) wrong view. But now it all began to fall into place, > and I thought, "Ah, so that's why the Great Forty Sutta describes > wrong view that way!" > > If there is kamma and vipaka, then concepts cannot be real. > Consider, for example, a beautiful ripe peach: Peaches are > delicious, nutritious food, and so, if they are real, having one > must be the result of some past good kamma. > > In other words, if a peach is real then it is an inherently > desirable object. But what if that same peach becomes stuck in my > throat and I suffer physical pain? Then, it must be inherently > undesirable and my experiencing of it is the result of past bad > kamma. But that is ridiculous - it can't be both inherently > desirable and inherently undesirable! The whole theory of kamma and > vipaka becomes nonsensical if concepts are real. ===== This example has really confused me. I think that we agree that peaches are what the ontologist (new word?) calls concepts and are therefore not real. I am not clear on the link to kamma here. The Patthana teaches us that the conditioned state of kamma condition is mind and kamma-born rupa. Peaches (as concepts) have nothing to do with kamma. The component realities that the ontologist says makes up a peach also have nothing to do with kamma. For example, the visible object does not arise because of kamma. However, the eye-consciousness mental state that takes the visible object as its object does arise because of kamma. The inherent quality of the object (undesirable, netural, desirable) is not related to kamma either. It is an intrinsic quality indpendent of the kammic stream of the perceiver. Of course, when an inherently undesireable object is taken as desirable by the perceiver, this is sanna-vipallasa (perversion of perception). Ken H, please expand on your kamma / reality example to help me to understand better. ===== > > So, don't worry that the Buddha didn't constantly point out that he > was talking about paramattha dhammas, not concepts. That was > established from the beginning - as the basis. Any inference that > concepts were real would have contradicted - and made a mockery of - > his entire teaching. ===== Sorry, Ken H, I do worry about it. The Buddha was not adverse to making basic statements when they were appropriate. I have a hard time accepting that the Buddha would have been silent on this issue if it were important to understanding the teaching. Metta, Rob M :-) 39485 From: Ken O Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 6:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi RobM Hmm we have not finish so dont run away from what you have started. I like to clear this reality and concept thing, not because of supporting what later Abhidhamma says or paramatha dhamma but rather this has great consequences in understanding the D.O. I am concern bacause a wrong foothold, will not lead to path of salvation. A wrong understanding what D.O stands for and what is to be directly known will have consequences. Ken o 39486 From: Andrew Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 7:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > Except in a single instance (SNXXII.94), the Buddha did not enter > into ontological discussions. Hi Rob M One point that is intriguing me. Nobody can get half pregnant. It's the same with ontology, isn't it? You either take a position or you don't. Buddha did. It only takes one time for this to happen. The only other alternative is like that idiosyncratic view of anatta: I'm not saying there is or isn't a self, but just tell yourself that a self can't be found. Or - the existence/nonexistence dichotomy is irrelevant to my teaching but because you're having a hard time on one issue, just tell yourself that these things exist. Still pondering ... Best wishes Andrew 39487 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 7:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Andrew, The Buddha also mentioned archers a couple of times in the Suttas when it was appropriate to make a point. Do we therefore conclude that archery is a key to understanding the Buddha's teaching? Of course not. I put ontological issues in the same bucket as archery. Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" > wrote: > > Except in a single instance (SNXXII.94), the Buddha did not enter > > into ontological discussions. > > Hi Rob M > > One point that is intriguing me. Nobody can get half pregnant. It's > the same with ontology, isn't it? You either take a position or you > don't. Buddha did. It only takes one time for this to happen. > > The only other alternative is like that idiosyncratic view of anatta: > I'm not saying there is or isn't a self, but just tell yourself that > a self can't be found. Or - the existence/nonexistence dichotomy is > irrelevant to my teaching but because you're having a hard time on > one issue, just tell yourself that these things exist. > > Still pondering ... > > Best wishes > Andrew 39488 From: Andrew Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 7:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Value of discussion (was evil thoughts) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Sometimes the synthesis of concept formation adds to one's knowledge > by not ignoring the network of relations. While I'm "talking trees", often *we > just don't see the forest for the trees* - to turn a common saying on its > head! Hi Howard, I am often unable to see the forest for the trees! I think that understanding realities (or should I now say "dhammas"?) in the present moment, requires an understanding of conditional relations. It may well be that the patterning of those relations over time equates to "conventional truth". Don't quote me on that though. I don't want to be the blind man feeling the elephant's tail just after it has had a very big meal! (-: Best wishes Andrew 39489 From: Andrew Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 7:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > > Hi Andrew, > > The Buddha also mentioned archers a couple of times in the Suttas > when it was appropriate to make a point. Do we therefore conclude > that archery is a key to understanding the Buddha's teaching? Of > course not. I put ontological issues in the same bucket as archery. > Hi Rob M ... but he didn't just mention ontology as an illustration or to let us know he was aware of it. As you have shown, on one occasion at least, he actually took an ontological position. I can't see how that bucket is big enough for both archery and ontology. But ... still pondering ... Best wishes Andrew 39490 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 7:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Ken O, Okay, lah... I will invoke a grandfather clause one last time and continue this thread with you :-) I will rationalize this by saying that you must have started typing this message before I posted my "no more ontological discussions" position! In fact, I also enjoy our discussions. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > Hi RobM > > I concern about reality and I dont care whether it is ontological > sense or not. Buddha did differentiate between concepts and reality. > D.O is the difference that says what is reality, what can be > directly known. ===== In the last post, Ken H said that reality / concepts was linked to kamma / vipaka. I did not understand his point. Now you are saying that reality / concepts is directly linked to Dependent Origination. I don't understand your point either. It seems as when one stops thinking in ontological terms, one's brain immediately turns into (conceptual) jello and you no longer understand what people are trying to tell you :-) Please humour this jello-brained ex-ontologist and run through the connection between reality / concepts and Dependent Origination. ===== > Ultimate reality or whatever anyone like to call it, > is a reality that can be directly known, it not so much what word we > used, it is the essence that is important. ===== According to the Mulapariyaya Sutta (Mn1), beings, gods and lots of things that ontologists throw into the "concept" bucket can also be "directly known". My recent posting to Andrew (message 39403) went into some detail on what "directly knows" means according to the commentary to this Sutta. ===== > Or we may be basing on > the wrong initial basis of development. Five aggregates, 8NP, D.O > are reality that can be directly known. Self is a mental construct > which cannot be found in the conditions. It is always presents > because of our underlying tendecies of the three roots that make us > believe it is there. ===== The way that "directly knows" is applied in the Mulapariyaya Sutta is to objects of consciousness. When you talk about five aggregates, 8NP and DO, I don't think you are referring to them as merely objects of consciousness. I suspect that you are treating them as "universal principles" (like the law of kamma). If I am correct in understanding your approach, then we run the risk of "mixing metaphors". Ontology deals with defining ultimate realities not with universal principles. ===== > > Our habitual inference to concepts that make us illusion to reality. > An apple can taste pleasant or unpleasant, but in reality it is the > tactile object and visible object that is directly known and not > apple. It is the plesant and unplesant feelings in the javana > process that make us dislike or crave the apple. It is not apple > that make us crave, it is the feelings as a conseqence of the contact > from sense object, sense base and sense citta that make us crave. It > is important to note this fine difference because we may end up > developing the wrong way. ===== As detailed in my post to Andrew (message 39403) the first step in directly knowing something is the break it into component dhammas, each with their own characterisitic, function, manifestation and proximate cause. This breaking into component dhammas helps us to overcome the illusion of constancy. This breaking into component dhammas can be done without assigning "ultimate reality" status in an ontological sense to the dhammas. I agree with everything you wrote about the apple. There is no reason why your reasoning requires that the component dhammas have "ultimate reality" status in an ontological sense. As a side issue, you wrote, "An apple can taste pleasant or unpleasant, but in reality it is the...". When you typed the word "in reality", were you thinking in an classification of existence (i.e. ontological) sense? We tend to be very loose with our usage of terms such as "reality" and this can generate considerable confusion (it has turned by brain into jello :-) ). ===== > > In fact, Acariya Anuruddha does not count sankhara as > > an "ultimate reality", he counts sankhara as a collection > > of "ultimate realities"; this is in spite of the fact that the > > Buddha said that sankhara "exists". > > K: Are you talking about sankhara as in sankhara aggregates. ===== Yes. ===== > In the > Dhammasangi, it is reference as a collective and they realities and > they exists. ===== Sankhara is a collection of dhammas (i.e. cetasikas) but should we consider something that is a collection of dhammas to be classified as an ultimate reality? This is the problem... In SNXXII.94, the Buddha said that sankhara exists (an ontological statement). However, Acariya Anuruddha states that sankhara is a collection of cetasikas does not possess ultimate reality status, only the component parts (the cetasikas) qualify as ultimate realities. ===== > I think you should read the book by the author again > because he did classify cetasikas (including in the sankhara) as > paramatha dhammas ===== The cetasikas which make up sankhara are paramattha dhammas, but sankhara as a collection of cetasiksa doesn't make the list of paramattha dhammas in its own right. ===== > > > Abhidhammatthasangaha says that "sankhara" is a concept for a group > of cetasikas with no separate existence. > > k: Could i known which book you are using and which page you are > refering and in which context it is saying about. Different context, > different explanation as what Nina has said. > > > Sorry Ken O, I may not have understood your last point. If you are > > saying that the Buddha used the same term "comprehend" for > > both "realities" and "concepts", then I agree that the Sutta does > > not differentiate. > > K: Direct comprehend - in Abhidhamma context - my opinion is > understanding reality. ===== My opinion, supported by the commentary is "understanding dhammas". ===== > Planes can be different but aggregates are > the same regardless what plane we dwell in. That is why Devas can > understand what Buddha say because it can be directly known even > though the concepts we have may be different. Remember I quote a > few months ago, a tribal person may not known what is a tank, but the > person can directly known the aggregates, he can feel pain or > pleasure and he can be taught dhamma to be enlighted. These examples > are to shown that reality can be directly known while conceps varies > and not the gist to development of the path. ===== This is similar to Mike's point that satipatthana requires a certain class of object and things suitable for satipatthana are called realities (not sure if it means in an ontological sense) and things not suitable for satipatthana are called concepts (again, not sure of the ontological implications, if any). I am not sure of this point. Some time soon, I hope to explore this matter further. If you (or anybody else) can point me to primary texts to support / refute this idea, I would be very grateful. Metta, Rob M :-) 39491 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 7:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Andrew, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" > wrote: > > > > Hi Andrew, > > > > The Buddha also mentioned archers a couple of times in the Suttas > > when it was appropriate to make a point. Do we therefore conclude > > that archery is a key to understanding the Buddha's teaching? Of > > course not. I put ontological issues in the same bucket as archery. > > > Hi Rob M > > ... but he didn't just mention ontology as an illustration or to let > us know he was aware of it. As you have shown, on one occasion at > least, he actually took an ontological position. > > I can't see how that bucket is big enough for both archery and > ontology. > > But ... still pondering ... ===== If you are a smoker, there is nothing you dread more than a discussion with an ex-smoker. Being an ex-ontologist, I don't treat ontology very kindly these days :-) In return, ontology treats me as though I do not even exist! :-) (which of course I don't... but the aggegates do :-) ). Metta, Rob M :-) 39492 From: Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 8:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Rob: "This is similar to Mike's point that satipatthana requires a certain class of object and things suitable for satipatthana are called realities (not sure if it means in an ontological sense) and things not suitable for satipatthana are called concepts (again, not sure of the ontological implications, if any). I am not sure of this point. Some time soon, I hope to explore this matter further. If you (or anybody else) can point me to primary texts to support / refute this idea, I would be very grateful." Hi Rob, The commentary to the Satipatthana Sutta is on ATI and as a booklet from BPS. Possibly one way to reconcile this controversy is to say concepts are views. And views are right or wrong but in either case not "me", "mine" or "yours". Larry 39493 From: robmoult Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 8:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Larry, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > The commentary to the Satipatthana Sutta is on ATI and as a booklet from > BPS. > ===== Yeah, I have Soma Thera's "Way of Mindfulness"... it is quite thick. I was kind of hoping that somebody would do the hard part for me and find a specific reference. In reality (not in an ontological sense :-) ), I would love to spend more time going through this volume to better understand Satipatthana. Metta, Rob M :-) 39494 From: Andrew Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 8:38pm Subject: Cooran Dhamma Discussions Dear Nina and All I am a bit late off the mark in giving some feedback on the discussions at our Cooran weekend. It was attended by myself, Ken H, Reg, Christine, Andy, Bruce and Steve. Rusty went to the kennels for the weekend as Cooran was just too far away for his old bones – and he quite likes the kennels anyway. Fortunately, the weather was overcast and cool. We found that the shed where we have meals and discussions was already occupied by a planigale (a small marsupial rat-like animal) with her babies clinging to her back – but she was willing to share the space with us, so all was well. Now, what can I remember of the discussions? We began by reading "A Look at the Kalama Sutta" by Bhikkhu Bodhi wherein he takes issue with those who read this sutta as showing that the Buddha was a pragmatic empiricist who dismissed all doctrine and faith and whose Dhamma was merely "a free-thinker's kit to truth which invites each one to accept and reject whatever he likes". Mike Nease brought the article to my attention and it is at www.buddhanet.net/e- learning/kalama1_1.htm We discussed saddha and whether common remarks that "Buddhism isn't a religion – it's a way of life" are accurate. Of course, it ultimately depends on how you define "religion". Reg has difficulty with the idea of rebirth and we discussed whether this was "lack of saddha" or something else. I think we all agreed that we all have moments with saddha and moments without. There was some controversy when I suggested that sometimes Ken H's descriptions of Dhamma veer towards annihilationism. And he said I was eel-wriggling. (-: We were actually discussing this quotation from Bhikkhu Bodhi's Introduction to the Brahmajala Sutta (The Discourse on the All-Embracing Net of Views, BPS): "The eternalist doctrine is said to originate through a misapplication of the "method of unity" (ekattanaya) to the continuum of experience which is the subject of examination. According to Buddhism, to be correctly understood, the continuum must be comprehended through two complementary methods of investigation, the "method of unity" (ekattanaya) and the "method of diversity" (nanattanaya). The method of unity discloses the coherence of the succession of distinct experiential occasions making up the continuum. It shows them as bound together in a single series, participants in a process of transmission and development, interconnected members unified through a law of conditional dependence. The method of diversity balances this by showing up the differences. Though unified, the current of experience is still a chain made up of distinct links. Some of these function as causes, others as effects. Moreover, the onward flow of the continuum is periodically interrupted; the events of death and rebirth break it up into separate life-terms which show marked differences despite the identity of the series. When these two methods are applied in conjunction, the current of experience will be correctly understood; but when they are misapplied or applied in a one-sided fashion, it will be misunderstood. The misapplication of the method of unity will lead to the belief in an identical self and thence to eternalism. The misapplication of the method of diversity will take the disruptive, discontinuous element in experience as absolute and thence lead to a doctrine of annihilationism. The correct application of both will show the continuum to be a causally connected succession of momentary processes, which continues so long as the causes retain their efficacy and ceases when the causes are de-activated, in either case without harbouring a persisting core to be grasped as a personal self. This is the middle way which avoids the two extremes." (end quote) Ken H wanted more information about the methods of unity and diversity. Steve said they are referred to in the Visuddhimagga. Any comments, anyone on how to best balance these 2 methods? I suggested that knowing the realities of the present moment entails knowing conditional relations (because of the time dimension) and that conventional language often referred to patterns of cittas … defilements … latent tendencies over time and these were important to understand. We read part of Ron W's booklet on Dependent Origination which includes quite a bit on science eg the biology of conception, zygotes etc. Ken H was most unimpressed as he considered this to be outside Dhamma and unhelpful in learning what the Buddha taught. Many more things were discussed including old favourites like the intrinsic pleasantness or unpleasantness of dhammas. I'm sure Ken H, Christine and Steve will chime in with their recollections and notes. Thanks to all. Best wishes Andrew 39495 From: Andrew Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 8:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > > > If you are a smoker, there is nothing you dread more than a > discussion with an ex-smoker. > > Being an ex-ontologist, I don't treat ontology very kindly these > days :-) In return, ontology treats me as though I do not even > exist! :-) (which of course I don't... but the aggegates do :-) ). Rob M Smoking and ontology in the one post? Are you suggesting that ontology leads to oncology? (-: Best wishes Andrew 39496 From: Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 9:35pm Subject: objects of satipatthana Hi Rob, In Soma Thera's "Way of Mindfulness" see pages 32 and 33, commentary on "kaayaanupassi". This will be in dsg archives under "way 21" and "way 22", I think. However, escribe is off-line right now. If you can locate the time frame these were posted Nina had some comments as well. SS Commentary: "In the body there is no contemplation of a uniform thing, apart from the big and small members of the body, or of a man or of a woman, apart from such things like the hair of the head and the hair of the body." Also, the sutta says, "Or his mindfulness is established with the thought, 'The body exists,' to the extent necessary just for knowledge and remembrance..." But apparently there isn't a commentary on this line. Larry 39497 From: Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 4:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Value of discussion (was evil thoughts) Hi, Andrew - In a message dated 12/6/04 10:15:27 PM Eastern Standard Time, athel60@t... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I am often unable to see the forest for the trees! > > I think that understanding realities (or should I now say "dhammas"?) > in the present moment, requires an understanding of conditional > relations. It may well be that the patterning of those relations > over time equates to "conventional truth". Don't quote me on that > though. I don't want to be the blind man feeling the elephant's tail > just after it has had a very big meal! (-: > > Best wishes > ========================== Andrew, I promise not to quote you (after this post, that is - in which I *have* quoted you! ;-). In any case, what you say above is quite close to my perspective on the matter. How about that!!! ;-)) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39498 From: Ken O Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 9:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Cooran Dhamma Discussions Hi Andrew I like to know hows does B Bodhi come to these two methods. Ken O 39499 From: kenhowardau Date: Mon Dec 6, 2004 10:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Rob M, ---------------- RM: > In my most recent message (message 39481), I vowed not to enter into any more "this is reality, this is concept" ontological- type discussions. But I will invoke a grandfather clause (you posted this message before I formally stated my position), and reply to you --------------------------- I admire your confidence, but you'll never hear the last of concepts and realities. Anyway, thanks for allowing this poor old bloke through the gate. --------------------- KH: > > If there is kamma and vipaka, then concepts cannot be real. > Consider, for example, a beautiful ripe peach: Peaches are > delicious, nutritious food, and so, if they are real, having one > must be the result of some past good kamma. > > In other words, if a peach is real then it is an inherently > desirable object. But what if that same peach becomes stuck in my > throat and I suffer physical pain? Then, it must be inherently > undesirable and my experiencing of it is the result of past bad > kamma. But that is ridiculous - it can't be both inherently > desirable and inherently undesirable! The whole theory of kamma and > vipaka becomes nonsensical if concepts are real. > > ===== RM: > This example has really confused me. I think that we agree that peaches are what the ontologist (new word?) calls concepts and are therefore not real. > ------------------ You're going to start me harrumphing again! :-) I know my message was a bit rushed and full of typos, but I thought it was pretty understandable. Now I'm having trouble with yours! Do you agree that peaches are not ultimately real, or is it only me and the other ontologists who think that? ---------------- RM: > I am not clear on the link to kamma here. The Patthana teaches us that the conditioned state of kamma condition is mind and kamma- born rupa. Peaches (as concepts) have nothing to do with kamma. The component realities that the ontologist says makes up a peach also have nothing to do with kamma. For example, the visible object does not arise because of kamma. However, the eye-consciousness mental state that takes the visible object as its object does arise because of kamma. ------------------- I think you are splitting hairs. Sense objects are experienced because of kamma. Therefore there is a 'link to kamma.' ----------------- RM: > The inherent quality of the object (undesirable, netural, desirable) is not related to kamma either. It is an intrinsic quality indpendent of the kammic stream of the perceiver. ------------------------------- I'll have to skip over "dependent on the kammic stream of the perceiver." I haven't heard that before. (Are you sure it's right?) However, the inherent quality of the sense object most certainly is linked to kamma. For example, sense-cognition that arises because of kusala kamma takes an inherently desirable object - there's your link! By the way, how did "neutral" sneak into the equation? I remember reading about "moderately desirable" but not "neutral." There is no neutral kamma, so I doubt any inherently neutral sense objects will be experienced. ----------------------- RM: > Ken H, please expand on your kamma / reality example to help me to understand better. ------------------------ I'm in a bit of a rush and then I won't be near a computer for two days. But I can't pass up this invitation. I must admit, my understanding could be wrong: It seems obvious to me, but now that you question it, I can't remember actually reading it anywhere. :- / (worried face) One intellectual understanding of right view is; "All kamma bears fruit: there is a result from every good deed and a result from every bad deed. Every desirable (and moderately desirable) sense object that arises is experienced as a result of a good deed. (And so on for every undesirable sense object.)" Now, when you taste a ripe peach, does that peach have any inherent desirable/undesirable qualities? No, we can't say that (for reasons I gave earlier). So, the right view "there is kamma and vipaka" does not apply to peaches (nor to any other concept). The Buddha was not talking about concepts when he taught right view. All of the Dhamma is [directly or indirectly] about right view. None of the Dhamma applies to concepts. When we hear the Dhamma, we must be constantly on our guards not to confuse paramattha dhammas with concepts. ------------------ KH: > > So, don't worry that the Buddha didn't constantly point out that he > was talking about paramattha dhammas, not concepts. That was > established from the beginning - as the basis. Any inference that > concepts were real would have contradicted - and made a mockery of - > his entire teaching. > > ===== RM : > Sorry, Ken H, I do worry about it. The Buddha was not adverse to making basic statements when they were appropriate. I have a hard time accepting that the Buddha would have been silent on this issue if it were important to understanding the teaching. > ----------- Hard time or not, I think you're going to have to accept it! (I know that's not a very satisfactory comment but I am running late.) :-) Ken H 39500 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 1:18am Subject: Letter to B.Bodhi-'The Jhânas and the Lay Disciple ..' Warning: Technical and Pali-filled - you may wish to ignore this one! ==================================== Dear Friends, As most people will recall, some time ago I posted an article by Bhikkhu Bodhi: “The Jhânas and the Lay Disciple According to the Pâli Suttas” I’m not aware that it has been published and may still be a draft, but it can be seen here: http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha267.htm There were some points relating to it which I considered further and raised in India. These can be heard on the recordings. In response to a note I sent, B.Bodhi suggested I make a very brief summary of these. This is my attempt. I apologise for the technicality and lack of translation of terms here. Anyone is most welcome to ask for any clarifications which I may or may not be able to give;-). Comments are welcome as usual! ***** Dear Ven Bodhi, Thankyou for your response. The following is a very brief summary of some of the difficult points raised in your article which I’ve been considering and also discussed briefly in India with K. Sujin as I mentioned. I apologise in advance for the point format which is merely to help me keep it brief and focussed and also for the Pali spelling. The points are not raised in any special order. 1.Just v.briefly, I found it a very useful article and piece of research and posted it on DSG in short instalments as a series for others to read as well. I agree with your main conclusion – that sotapannas do not necessarily possess jhana at all and that the textual sources make this clear. 2.With regard to the open questions you raise about anagamis and arahants in this regard, you wonder if the commentaries may have deviated from the Nikayas when they specifically specify that prior attainment of jhanas is not any pre-requisite . In your final conclusion you raise the Satipatthana Sutta as possibly supporting the commentaries. However, you raise other suttas which might suggest the requirement of prior jhana achievement for these stages of enlightenment. As you know, I have a lot of confidence in the Pali commentaries and was interested to look at any possible conflicts.. 3.Under ‘When Do the Jhaanas Become Necessary?’ you refer to AN3:85, referring to adhisiila –sikkhaa, adhicitta-sikkhaa and adhipa~n~naa-sikkha. As you point out, adhisiila is perfected by the sotapanna, adhicitta by the anagami and adhipanna by the arahant. As I understand, these develop with satipatthana, (there is guarding of the 6 doors, firmness of citta and understanding at such moments), so that adhisiila is perfected by the sotapanna who can no longer break the precepts, but of course virati continues developing. Adhicitta is perfected by the anagami with the eradicated of attachment to sensuous objects resulting in this degree of calm when the developed vipassana is more absolute.. It doesn’t mean the 4 jhanas have necessarily been attained and adhicitta-sikkhaa is only developed in the one developing the Path. (cf 7 Visuddhi which of course also refer to the purification of sila, citta etc with wisdom). I believe that adhi in adhi sila indidcates the difference between satipatthana sila and ordinary sila, in other words, ‘higher sila’ etc. AN IV,1: “It is through not understanding, not penetrating noble morality….noble concentration….noble wisdom…noble deliverance that I, as well as you, have had for such a long time to pass this round of rebirths.” 4.It may be that adhicitta is defined by the 4 jhanas in context – it would depend on who is being addressed. As we know, many of the main disciples at the time had indeed attained all jhanas and for them, such calm/concentration would be defined in such a way if the jhanas are used as a basis for enlightenment, I’d think. In otherwords, the 1st,2nd,3rd,4th jhana formulas are only for those who have developed jhana to those degrees. For those who haven’t, 1st jhana equivalent Samadhi is there at lokuttara moments as you’ve explained, because of nibbana being the object, not by having developed jhana. 5.In some contexts we also have to keep in mind the two meanings of jhana – one referring to the object which can ‘burn away’ the defilements (aramma.nuu-panijjhaana)and the other which develops with satipatthana (lakkha.nuupjijhaana). 6.With regard to AN4:169/11 and the asa.nkhaara-parinibbaayii and the sasa.nkhaara=-parinibbaayii,you referred to samadhi bala as defined in terms of jhanas. You also referred to this sutta in a letter to me. Whilst saying it supports the attainment of arahantship by ‘a dry-insight approach’, you also raised the question of the panca sekhabalaani and samaadhi bala which is often defined ‘by the four jhana formula’. Surely, samadhi bala as one of the 5 balas included in the bodhipakkhiya dhammas, developed at moments of satipatthana are different from samadhi bala as a jhana factor, developing with samatha development. There are many ways to talk about the variety oft ariyans of course and again we need to look at contexts when reading about balas. 7.In an earlier section of the article under ‘The Stream-enterer and Jhaana’, you refer to SN 55:40. ‘When the mind is concentrated, phenomena become manifest….’Panna and Samadhi surely condition each other and arise together in the development of satipatthana. Indeed, at stages of vipassana ~nana, they are ‘yoked’ together (yuganaddha) because of the clarity at such times. The object is so clear at such times that the samadhi is apparent.This contrasts with the beginning of satipatthana., otherwise there’s no different level. However, even at vipassana ~nana, it must be khanika samadhi, not appanaa (access) as I believe you suggest. The objects of the samadhi and panna are still characteristics of reality (i.e 4 foundations of mindfulness). ***** There may have been other points, but these are the ones I had a particular interest in and I’ve already overstepped your request for a very brief summary. Of course, I hope there may be something here which is of very small assistance to you and hope your health and translation work is progressing as smoothly as can be expected. Please let us know if you’ll be visiting Hong Kong again and if we can offer further assistance. Metta, Sarah p.s I could try to identify the relevant parts of the recordings where these points are discussed in two or three separate discussions, but I’d only be able to point to the segments. Pls let me know if this would be of interest. ========================================== 39501 From: Ken O Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 1:40am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Rob M > > In the last post, Ken H said that reality / concepts was linked to > kamma / vipaka. I did not understand his point. k: Because in order to cognize sense objects, there must be kamma for sense base to be present. Which means blind man will not have eye base for eye citta to arise to cognize that object. Another point is that sense objects are desirable or undesirable depends on kamma. R: Now you are saying that reality / concepts is directly linked to Dependent Origination. I don't understand your point either. K: Reality is link to D.O because they are reality itself. Craving is a reality. As I said in the earlier example, pleasant feeling (in the javana process) arise when we eat an apple will condition craving to arise. Apple itself is a mental construct but the taste of the apple is reality. In the same way, an apple can be called in different names by different country but the taste of the apple can be directly known. A tribal person who do not known what is apple, but the taste of the apple after eating it, is a reality he will known. We dont care what apple is or what plane we dwell in, but aggregates can be directly known. > It seems as when one stops thinking in ontological terms, one's > brain immediately turns into (conceptual) jello and you no longer > understand what people are trying to tell you :-) k: Ontological terms is a very abstract philisophy to me because I dont learn it in my school days. I only known the difference what can be directly known and what not. > ===== > > According to the Mulapariyaya Sutta (Mn1), beings, gods and lots of >> things that ontologists throw into the "concept" bucket can also > be "directly known". My recent posting to Andrew (message 39403) > went into some detail on what "directly knows" means according to > the commentary to this Sutta. > > ===== k: Gods, planes are make up of the five aggregates. Directly known is the aggregate and not the gods and planes. They only exist in a mental construct and comprehend as mental construct but they cannot be directly known (or you prefer experience). Feeling, energy, carving etc all can be directly experience but concepts do not exist in us if we do not come across it. Just like the concept of a tank will be alien to a tribal person but the hardness of the tank when touching is real, can be directly known. Or maybe a good exmaple Buddha always used is the baby example, where he said that underlying tendecies are known to a baby and to me a baby is alien to concepts. The notion of a mother is a construct but the feelings the baby felt for the mother is real. It is the feeling in a way help to condition that a mother is a pleasant feeling. So he crave for the mother not because of the mother as a construct but the pleasant feeling that arise. > > As detailed in my post to Andrew (message 39403) the first step in > directly knowing something is the break it into component dhammas, > each with their own characterisitic, function, manifestation and > proximate cause. This breaking into component dhammas helps us to > overcome the illusion of constancy. This breaking into component > dhammas can be done without assigning "ultimate reality" status in > an ontological sense to the dhammas. k: I am trying to say there is difference between this breaking up. The breaking of a concept is possible because it is a construct conditioned by the senses. But there is no breaking up of reality. It cannot be further break up. I am debate this with Micheal before on this. If feelings can be further break up, then Buddha will say there is sub and sub feelings but Buddha say only five types of feelings. If feelings can be further break up, D.O will be different. R: I agree with everything you wrote about the apple. There is no reason why your reasoning requires that the component dhammas have "ultimate reality" status in an ontological sense. k: Pardon me, I really dont know what is this ontological stuff. I only know if it can be directly known, it is reality. ===== > Sankhara is a collection of dhammas (i.e. cetasikas) but should we > consider something that is a collection of dhammas to be classified > as an ultimate reality? This is the problem... In SNXXII.94, the > Buddha said that sankhara exists (an ontological statement). > However, Acariya Anuruddha states that sankhara is a collection of > cetasikas does not possess ultimate reality status, only the > component parts (the cetasikas) qualify as ultimate realities. > ===== k: In the same way, when Buddha talks about the three roots, where are they in the aggregates. They are in the sankhara aggregates. They exist but the collective is used to organise them for teaching of the dhamma. There is no contradiction, what Buddha says that sankhara exist as aggregates and what Acariya does is that this collection is a heap (as aggregates is known as a heap etc) and should not be mistaken as a reality. I think what Acariya is saying that it should be known as a heap of ultimate realities and sankhara is just a term used in this context for teaching purposes and not to be mistaken as ultimate reality. Just like the issue about supramundane cittas, where Acariya said that they are devoid of suffering, that was in the context when there is no clinging involved. But we know that suffering is inherent in all cittas due to formation, so there is suffering regardless there is or there is no clinging. As Nina said, depending on how in what context it is used. Ken O 39502 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 1:42am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 157 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, We are discussing on 18 ahetuka cittas. 3 are ahetuka kiriya cittas and 15 are ahetuka vipaka cittas. Among 3 ahetuka kiriya cittas, we have discussed on pancadvaravajjana citta and manodvaravajjana citta at molecular level. There is a third ahetuka kiriya citta. It is called 'somanassa saha gatam hastituppada citta'. Unlike other 2 ahetuka kiriya cittas which are never able to do javana function, this citta 'ahetuka hasituppada citta' can do the job of javana. Because of this citta, arahats have to smile. In this citta, all of 7 universal cetasikas arise. They are 1. phassa/contact, 2. vedana/feeling, 3. cetana/volition, 4. sanna/perception, 5. ekaggata/one-pointedness, 6. jivitindriya/mental life, 7. manasikara/attention. Each of these 7 does their respective job while this citta arises. Among 6 pakinnaka cetasikas or 6 particular mental factors, 5 of these cetasikas arise with hasituppada citta. These 5 cetasikas are 1. vitakka/initial application, 2. vicara/sustained application, 3. piti/joy, 4. viriya/effort, 5. adhimokkha/decision. In this citta, chanda cetasika does not arise. Chanda does not arise in all of 18 ahetuka cittas. As there is no hetu or no root such as lobha, dosa, moha or alobha, adosa, amoha, chanda does not arise in these 18 ahetuka citta. There is no wish to perform their respective jobs in these 18 ahetuka cittas. That is why chanda does not arise in these 18 ahetuka cittas. In this dhamma molecule, one atom is 'citta' which is pure, luminous, sinless. Other 12 atoms are as described above and they are 7 universal cetasikas and 5 of 6 pakinnaka cetasikas or 5 of 6 particular mental factors. They arise together inseparably. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39503 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 2:26am Subject: Re: Five Natural Laws, Panca Niyamas Dear Dhamma Friends, The first three niyamas or the first 3 natural laws are at least clear to anyone if they have learnt to some extent. But kamma is an area of the most difficult dhamma. Even experienced Buddhists, experienced meditators, experienced Dhamma achievers would not be able to explain kamma in its full extent. I myself do not know much about 'Kamma'. I just learned something about kamma, kamma and related matters, kamma paccaya of 24 conditions. Here I remember The Buddha's words saying what he preached was like leaves in his fistful hand while all he knew was like leaves in the whole forest. I think this unpreached part would be about detail of 'kamma niyama' and 'dhamma niyama'. The reason that The Buddha did not preach all he knew are many in my opinion. Because even great arahats who had extremely good intelligence were not taught about these, there is no way for us to follow. I myself would follow the studying of 'citta niyama' and would practise to be liberated from this endless samsara. Because utu niyama will be endless. From Copernicus to Watson & Crick, there had been many many thinkers and experimentors who contributed to science. But still there are many to be discovered. However they are discovered they would not lead us to liberation from the samsara. Again, gene and genetic law is also miracle. Now many scientists are trying to manipulate genes. They are trying to 'switch on' and 'switch off' some genes. Even they are contemplating that our cells in the body can be cloned and there might be many copies of us. When our body become worn out then our memories in the brain would be transferred to a very tiny chip and this memory chip would be inserted into the cloned body who is identical to us. In this way, eternal life is being contemplated. But this is not the way to liberation. The third law 'citta niyama' is also limitless. As utu niyama and bija niyama are miracles, citta niyama is also miracles. I also think The Buddha did not preach all about 'citta niyama' because it was not needed for liberation. I mean full account of 'citta niyama'. Even today 'Abhidhamma' that The Buddha left is already complicated and complex. But at least, we can learn for some foundation for our practical effort to walk on the liberation Path. Regarding 'Kamma Niyama',I have to extend this to a further point because some think 'kamma' as those of reward/punishment matters. Kamma is not exactly reward/punishment. I mean there are some sets of belief system that reward/punishment is well accepted. Example is that some think there are internal events and external events. A man helped an old lady cross the road. At the other side he was then kissed by a young lady. This is not kamma. These are not internal or external. There are different classifications on kamma. I think it would be better that we discuss this separately in other thread as this mail has been very long. May you be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 39504 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 2:37am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 158 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, So far we have discussed on 40 lokuttara cittas or supramundane consciousness in detail at molecular level. After that we have touched the area of different jhanas including arupa jhana or immaterial absorption and rupa jhana or material absorption. They are 27 mahaggata cittas or 27 greater consciousness. These 27 jhana cittas are also called 'majjhima cittas' or 'middle consciousness'. Because they are higher than sensuous plane consciousness or kamavacara cittas but they are inferior to lokuttara cittas or supramundane consciousness. These 27 jhana cittas have been explained down to the molecular and atomic levels. After that we discussed on 24 kama sobhana cittas or 24 beautiful sensuous plane consciousness. 40 + 27 + 24 = 91 cittas are sobhana cittas and out of 121 total cittas, 30 cittas are asobhana cittas or non-beautiful consciousness. Among them 12 akusala cittas are no doubt they are ugly and non-beautiful. We have discussed on 12 akusala cittas at molecular level. There are 18 ahetuka cittas. They seem to be simless. They are not creators or they do not produce or create any further kamma. But as they do not own any of beautiful roots namely alobha, adosa, and amoha or panna, they all are known as non-beautiful consciousness or asobhana cittas. Among them 3 ahetuka kiriya cittas have been discussed in DT-157. 15 ahetuka vipaka cittas will be discussed in DT- 159. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39505 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 3:03am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 159 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 15 ahetuka vipaka cittas. Here I like to extend on vipaka cittas. These 15 ahetuka vipaka cittas are all asobhana cittas. There sobhana cittas or beautiful consciousness which are vipaka cittas. There are 8 sahetuka kamavacara mahavipaka cittas. 8 mahavipaka cittas are called sahetuka vipaka cittas. Sa means 'with'. Sahetuka means 'along with hetu or root' such as alobha, adosa, amoha. To differentiate this from ahetuka vipaka cittas, these 8 mahavipaka cittas are called sahetuka kama vipaka cittas. Again there are other sobhana vipaka cittas. They are rupavipaka cittas which are patisandhi, bhavanga, and cuti citta of rupa brahmas and arupavipaka cittas which are patisandhi, bhavanga and cuti citta of arupa brahmas. To differentiated from these kama vipaka cittas are named as mahavipaka cittas. Mahavipaka cittas are called sahetuka vipaka cittas to differentiate them from ahetuka vipaka cittas. There are 15 ahetuka vipaka cittas. All these are vipaka cittas. I will repeat that all these 15 ahetuka vipaka cittas are vipaka cittas. They are resultant consciousness. I repeated because not to confuse their later explanation. These 15 ahetuka vipaka cittas have two groups. One group is the reasult of akusala cittas in the past and another group is the result of kusala cittas in the past. As all 15 cittas are kamavacara cittas, all vipaka cittas of these 15 cittas are also kama vipaka cittas. There are 7 ahetuka akusala vipaka cittas and 8 ahetuka kusala vipaka cittas, altogether 15 ahetuka vipaka cittas. Here some may confuse 'vipika cittas' with 'kusala' and 'akusala'. That is why I repeated above. These 2 groups are corresponding to each other. I mean comparable to each other. When there is akusala vipaka cakkhuvinnana citta, there also is kusala vipaka cakkhuvinnana citta. Comparable as I mentioned is this paring. But there is an extra citta which is not in pair. It is 'somanassa saha gatam ahetuka kusala vipaka santirana citta'. So ther 14 cittas or other 7 pairs are Akusala vipaka Kusala vipaka 1.cakkhuvinnana citta | 1.cakkhuvinnana citta 2.sotavinnana citta | 2.sotavinnana citta 3.ghanavinnana citta | 3.ghanavinnana citta 4.jivhavinnana citta | 4.jivhavinnana citta 5.kayavinnana citta | 5.kayavinnana citta 6.sampaticchana citta | 6.sampaticchana citta 7.santirana citta | 7.santirana citta All these 14 cittas are upekkha cittas. That means they all have upekkha vedana or indifferent feeling. To differentiate upekkha santirana of kusala vipaka citta, 8th ahetuka kusala vipaka citta is called 'somanassa santirana citta' as it is accompanied by piti or somanassa. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39506 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 5:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > > Hi Rob K, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" > wrote: > > > > Dear RobM, > > I think seeing what is reality (dhamma) and what is not is > stressed > > throught the teachings. > > The Udanaatthakatha (trans. masefield p.878)Blind from birth > > chapter:"since they do not know Dhamma, they do not know that which > > is not > > Dhamma either. ....... they neither know dhamma to be a thing > having > > an owm nature (sabhava), nor do they know that which is not dhamma > > to > > be a thing lacking an own nature.(Dhammam sabhavadhammam..adhammam > > asabhavadhammam) And as such they declare a thing having an own > > nature as though it were a thing lacking an own > nature....""endquote > > This passage was written hundreds of years before Anuruddha was > born. > ==================== > In your message above, you wrote, "I think seeing what is reality > (dhamma) and what is not is stressed throught the teachings." If you > had written, "I think seeing what are dhammas is stressed throught > the teachings." ....... > you have made it into an ontological statement which I do not think > finds any support in the texts. >> > The fact that in the Suttas, the Buddha made only one ontological > statement (thanks for locating SNXXII.94 for me), suggests to me > that we should not try to turn "dhammas" into "ultimate realities". > == dear RobM, I have no idea what ontolgical statements are or why you think they are important or not important. You say that there is no support in the texts for saying that "what is reality > (dhamma) and what is not is stressed throught the teachings" yet then you seem to change that and say that in fact the Buddha did say so on one occasion? (I am trying to infer this from your statement about ontologies)? But there are so many suttas where the Buddha contrasts what is real- the aggregates(khandhas) with what is only concept, a convenient term: "For this has been said: As with the assembly of parts The word chariot is countenanced, So, when the khandhas are present, A being is said in common usage." (Kindred Sayings I, 135) 39507 From: agriosinski Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 5:17am Subject: Re: Concept and Reality in Primary Texts --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > Hi Ken H > > > In other words, if a peach is real then it is an inherently > > desirable object. But what if that same peach becomes stuck in my > > throat and I suffer physical pain? Then, it must be inherently > > undesirable and my experiencing of it is the result of past bad > > kamma. But that is ridiculous - it can't be both inherently > > desirable and inherently undesirable! The whole theory of kamma and > vipaka becomes nonsensical if concepts are real. > > k: Yes, I think this is good :). Some pple like apple and some > dont. It is pleasant and unpleasant to different people, so what is > real, the pleasant and unpleasant or the apple :) > > > Ken O :) Firstly I would like to thank RobM for an excellent topic, and secondly all of the participants. I really enjoyed reading it. I like the humorous way it turns :) My take on this subject, is that D.O. is Buddhist ontology. In western ontology there is question of reality, in D.O. there is no. D.O. is showing more dynamic view of what is called reality by westerners. More dynamic by impermanent nature of it. That dismissed something like last 15 centuries of philosophy I guess... ;) metta. Agrios. 39508 From: Hugo Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 7:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Value of discussion (was evil thoughts) On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 23:39:01 -0000, Andrew wrote: > Thanks for your example but I have to be honest and say that it > didn't click with me. I suppose the basic issue is, if we can't > remember direct knowing, how can we say "when I meditate every > morning I directly know anatta/anicca etc"? I think you and I are in different "frequencies" here. Let's try again later. > Anyway, we all do as we do and may we all do it with patience. I agree. -- Hugo 39509 From: Hugo Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 7:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Value of discussion (was evil thoughts) On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 23:39:01 -0000, Andrew wrote: > We *think* we do ... but > is that wisdom or ignorance, actuality or conceit? All the blind men > thought they knew what an elephant was ... I agree with you 100%. And I have been burned by that not once, but MANY times, and I think I will continue be burned by that for still more time. > I think that understanding realities (or should I now say "dhammas"?) > in the present moment, requires an understanding of conditional > relations. I agree with you 100%. > I don't want to be the blind man feeling the elephant's tail just after it has had a very big meal! (-: I agree with you 500%. :-) > Bhikkhu Bodhi has pointed > out that most of the wrong views discussed by the Buddha in the > Brahmajala Sutta arise, not after intellectualising and book- > learning, but after intense meditations. Huh? How can that be for > those who shun Dhamma study and believe that meditation is directly > knowing the mind? (I'm not talking about you or anyone else - I, in > fact, used to believe this many years ago). I have always advocated a "balanced approach" to anything. Sometimes I need theory to learn something but if I want to put it in action, I need practice. Sometimes I need theory and practice even just to learn it. Sometimes I need only practice. P.S. Now, we are in 'sync'. :-) Greetings, -- Hugo 39510 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 7:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: As a result, I will actively engage myself in discussions on dhammas > but I will actively disengage myself from ontological type > discussions on "realities" (especially "realities vs. concepts"). > > Metta, > Rob M :-) Friend Rob M, I think that this is a very good idea (especially since I do the same, except recently ;-)). It would be even better if you only engage in discussion about dhammas as they relate to dependent origination- then the discussions would be most beneficial to all concerned. Metta, James 39511 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 7:35am Subject: [dsg] Re: Giving a Smile Friend Ken O, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > Hi Friend James > > Renunication does not mean you shave your head and become a bhikkhu, > Renunication means abandonment, relinquishment. It cannot happen > without alobha. Dana cannot be possible without alobha, without > relinquishement, without non-attachment I see what you are getting at but this is a stretch in logic. Just because renunciation requires alobha and dana requires alobha, that doesn't make renunciation dana. They are still two different things. Giving alms to a monk and actually being a monk are two very different things. > > Under the A Treatise of the Paramis, you can see it in abhidhamma.org > < dispel greed for things that can be given away; its manifestation is > non-attachment, or the achievement of prosperity and a favourable > state of existence; an object that can be relinquished is its > proximate cause.>> This supports what I have been saying, Dana will result in a favorable state of existence, not necessarily enlightenment. > > Buddha has been perfecting it during his bodhisatta time for aeons > and yet people say it cannot be found in 8NP Right. Again, the Noble Eightfold Path leads to enlightenment, not the perfection of the paramis. :) Let me tell you > another little secret, all the paramis can be found in the 8NP but > only a Buddha would perfect all of them :). This is again a stretch in logic. If this were true, then the Noble Eightfold Path would only be for the creation of Buddhas. > > > Ken O Metta, James 39512 From: Ken O Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 9:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Giving a Smile Hi Friend James J: Just because renunciation requires alobha and dana requires alobha, that doesn't make renunciation dana. They are still two different things. Giving alms to a monk and actually being a monk are two very different things. K: definitely they are two things, we are not asking you to relinquish to become a monk. Relinquishment can be in terms of sense pleasure etc. Anyway it is not a stretch of logic, lobha is sometimes known as genorisity while lobha is known as greed. > > This supports what I have been saying, Dana will result in a > favorable state of existence, not necessarily enlightenment. k: Sorry this is part of Buddha perfection, it is needed for perfection of a Buddha. Without it as a base, it is difficult to shed the attachment to self view, to conceit. > This is again a stretch in logic. If this were true, then the > Noble Eightfold Path would only be for the creation of Buddhas. k: You did not see what I say, only Buddha prefected it while the rest dont. Why dont you give me any paramis that is not in the 8NP. Ken O 39513 From: Ken O Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 9:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Rob M Let me quote you this sutta SN12.12(2) Moliyaphaggana <<"Venerable sir, who consumes the nutriment citta?" "Not a valid question," the Blessed One replied. "I do not say, "One consumes.: If I should asay, "One consumes,' in that case this would be a valid question: 'Venerable sir, who consumes?' But I do not speak thus. Since I do not speak thus, if one should ask me, 'Venerable sir, for what is the nutriment citta [a condition]?" this would be a valid question.">> Rob, remember what I said earlier, I am interested in reality and not whether it is ontological. Reality are conditiones that can be directly known or experience or felt but not concepts. Here is this sutta, Buddha is interested in citta (an aggregate) because it is reality that can be directly known while the part on 'one' and 'you' are concepts which cannot be directly. Another way to look at it is take concepts as dreams while reality as when you are wide alert. I talking a lot on this because understanding reality, will bring us to a deeper level to the understanding of D.O, a deeper level of understand this anatta business. In the end it is the five aggregates that matters. Ken O 39514 From: Ken O Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 10:29am Subject: Re: Bhante and Smiling was (Re: [dsg] Evil thoughts (Howard)) Hi Bhante I have not forgetten your question. Buddha never used this five things very loosely. When Buddha talks about skillfulness in the Koalamas what is about. A look at this sutta below will tell us that on what basis these five terms should be based on wisdom (I dont think there is a need for me to elaborate what is wisdom in Buddha context) SN 35 Salayatanasamyutta).153 Is there a method "there is a method of exposition by means by which a bhikkhu - apart from faith...apart from acceptance of a view after pondering - can declare final knowledge thus: 'Destroyed is birth...there is no more for this state of being.' And what is that method of of exposition? Here, bhikkhus, having seen a form with the eye, if there is lust, hatred, or delusion internally, a bhikkhu understands: There is lust, hatred or delusion internally'; or if there is no lust, hatred or delusion internally, he understands: There is no lust, hatred or delusion internally. Since this is so, are these things to be understood by faith, or by personal perference or by oral tradition or by reasoned reflection or by acceptance of a view after pondering it?" "No venerable sir." "Arent these things to be understood by seeing them with wisdom?" "Yes venerable sir." "this bhikkus is the method of exposition by means of which a bhikkhu can declare final knowledge thus: 'Destroyed is birth...there is no more for this state of being.'>> Then again this five things is explore in MN 95 Canki Sutta, I am a bit lazy to type it out all. When Buddha ask us to put faith on, the basis is seen on this sutta <<16. In that ways, Master Gotama, there is preservation of truth; in that one perserves truth, in that way we recognise the preservation of truth. But in what way, Master Gotama, is there discovery of truth? In what way does one discover turth? We ask Master Gotama about the discovery of truth." . . 18 When he investigated him [a venerable one] and has seen that he is purified from based on greed, he next investigates him regard to states based on hate.... . . <<20. When he has investigate him and has seen that he is puried from states based on delusion, then he places faith in him;>> B: The rest of the Kalama Sutta deals with the practice of the > Brahma Viharas and this definitely deals with happiness and smiling. Don't you agree? k: Smiling and the four immeasurables are two different things. And also before going into Brahma Viharas, the sutta mention <> and also I did not see any about smile to be used before or after Brahma Viharas. Where did you get this smile method from? If you get it from somewhere in the text, I admit I am wrong about this method and I apolgise, if not please do not teach others about such wrong methods which cannot be found anywhere in the text. Ken O 39515 From: Ken O Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 10:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Rob M In fact I should add, understand reality is very important for the development of the path. Understand reality makes dhamma clear and concise and focus especially during wise attentions on dhammas. Ken O 39516 From: Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 5:39am Subject: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Concept ...) Hi, Ken (and Rob) - In a message dated 12/7/04 12:47:46 PM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: > > Rob, remember what I said earlier, I am interested in reality and not > whether it is ontological. Reality are conditiones that can be > directly known or experience or felt but not concepts. Here is this > sutta, Buddha is interested in citta (an aggregate) because it is > reality that can be directly known while the part on 'one' and 'you' > are concepts which cannot be directly. Another way to look at it is > take concepts as dreams while reality as when you are wide alert. > > I talking a lot on this because understanding reality, will bring us > to a deeper level to the understanding of D.O, a deeper level of > understand this anatta business. In the end it is the five aggregates > that matters. > ====================== Anatta and paticcasamupada. are certainly realities, Ken. They are not, however, paramattha dhammas, are they? If they were, it could be specified which khandhas they belonged to. I cannot so specify. Can you? In a previous post to Rob M you wrote "Five aggregates, 8NP, D.O are reality that can be directly known." The five aggregates is a collection of five collections. Actually, the five aggregates is the conventional person. That is a reality of sorts - a conventional reality on the same order as a tree, table, or chariot. It has less reality than the other items you mention, because it is only knowable conceptually. The eightfold noble path , a reality, cannot be a paramattha dhamma, can it? It is not nibbana. And what khandha does it belong to? I've already pointed out that dependent origination, while a reality, is not a member of any of the five khandas. Likewise for conditionality in general. It is neither rupa nor vi~n~nana nor vedana nor sa~n~na nor sankhara. And it is not nibbana. So it is not a paramattha dhamma. The relations laid out in the Patthana are all realities, but they are each neither nibbana nor a member of any of the khandhas. They are realities, knowable by conceptualization and by wisdom, but they are not paramattha dhammas. So there is no basis to identify being a reality with being a paramattha dhamma. There are realities, very important ones, that belong to none of the khandhas and are not nibbana either. That is, they are not paramattha dhammas. The paramattha dhammas have the ability to arise as objects of consciousness *without* the necessary intercession of either conceptualization or wisdom. But anatta, for example, is not an object of consciousness except by means of concept or wisdom, indirectly in the 1st case, and directly in the 2nd, and it is not a paramattha dhamma. A cautionary note: I am *not* saying that being a paramattha dhamma is an empty notion. It is well defined and is importantly special, I believe. It simply is not synonymous with being real, and it is not synonymous with existing. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39517 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 10:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Cooran Dhamma Discussions Dear Andrew, thank you very much for your report on the discussions. Not easy stuff. I like this part: diversity. Steve said they are referred to in the Visuddhimagga. > Any comments, anyone on how to best balance these 2 methods? > > I suggested that knowing the realities of the present moment entails > knowing conditional relations (because of the time dimension) and > that conventional language often referred to patterns of cittas … > defilements … latent tendencies over time and these were important to > understand. Khun Sujin would say: what about dhamma now? This helps people not to get involved in the theory. She stresses very much that we should not just know realities by name, but we mostly do, that is the trouble. Yes, we read in the Vis. about unity and diversity, I believe under the second stage of insight, knowing dhammas as conditioned. When we read this, we have to be very careful not to read this as theory. This goes for many passages of the Vis. We could get lost very easily. Nice about the rat and young who kept company with you. Nina. op 07-12-2004 05:38 schreef Andrew op athel60@t...: We found that the shed where we have meals and > discussions was already occupied by a planigale (a small marsupial > rat-like animal) with her babies clinging to her back – but she was > willing to share the space with us, so all was well. 39518 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 10:54am Subject: Re: Di.t.thijukamma, was Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Dear Mike, op 07-12-2004 02:33 schreef m. nease op mlnease@z...: It is in consideration of this that it is stated > in the commentary to the Diigha Nikaaya that straightening one's view has > the characteristic of being relevant to them all {daana, sila, bhaavanaa}." > Admittedly this is only eight hundred years old or so and isn't from the > Nikaayas. Still I like it because it agrees with my (current) opinions... > > I first read about the kusala of di.t.thijjukamma some years ago in Khun > Sujin's writing. N: Yes, I discussed this with Kh sujin and understood: also at moments without pañña you can see the benefit of kusala though you might not have seen this before. I think, under the influence of good friendship, for example, there can be a change from akusala to kusala. The T.A. (here p. 186, 187) is more recent, but it is based on old material. Some passages are the same as the Vis. Tiika. But the Co to D.N. dates from the oldest time. I looked up, Sangiti sutta the threes, and its Co (p. 1000): di.t.th' ujjugata.m pana sabbesa.m niyama-lakkhana.m...di.t.th' ujjugata.m tiisu pi sa.ngaha.m gacchati. Nina. 39519 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 10:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: renunciation Dear Mike and Ken O, renunciation, nekkhamma, I just looked into the Co. of Digha Nikaya, Sangiti sutta (the threes, p. 987): all kusala are nekkhamma, Sabbe pi kusalaa dhammaa nekkhamma-dhaatu ti aya.m nekkhamma-dhaatu. Thus, a very wide meaning. You renounce akusala, clinging to your own confort and pleasures. It includes selflessness. There are many gems in the Recital (Sangiti) sutta and Co, Mike, you should read it. This text is not too difficult and you can read it in very small portions. Nina. op 07-12-2004 03:07 schreef m. nease op mlnease@z...: > The more I look at references to renunciation, relinquishing and so on (in > English translation) the more I find they have to do with, yes, daana, > generosity--NOT 'letting go' of something unwholesome. Detachment? Alobha? > All more closely related, in the Paali texts, to generosity than to any > other concept or any other cetasika, as I read it. 39520 From: nina Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 10:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Dear friend James, op 06-12-2004 07:11 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@y...: > Nina: Dhamma is like a mirror. > > James: I like this phrase, very poetic, but I'm not sure what you > mean. N: Through the Dhamma we learn to clearly see our defilements and clearly see realities as they are. Quotes: Nina: At the same time Kh.S. helps us all not to take kusala nor > akusala for self and to learn to detect our clinging to self. > > James: What is this `self' that you often refer to? Do you mean > desire and craving for existence? You seem to speak about `self' as > if a `self' really exists. My understanding is that no `self' > exists, only the desire for existence. N: An underlying clinging to the idea of self. It is personality belief, sakkaya ditthi. When we are reminded: here is the self again, we all know that there is no self, but we do not say all the time the whole phrase: here is again the clinging to the wrong view of self. Kh. Sujin's reminders are short and effective. > > Nina: James, do you see: Right view is wholesomeness. > > James: Yes. That's an easy one, give me a harder question. ;-)) N: It is not easy, do we know exactly what right view is? Quote: Nina: It is an exhortation to develop pañña. > > James: I have no issues with the importance of developing panna > (wisdom). It is very crucial. However, the issue I have is when > the development of panna supersedes or replaces the development of > sila and samadhi. Sila, Samadhi, and Panna should all be developed > to the greatest extent possible, this is the Noble Eightfold Path. N: I quite agree, they are the three divisions of the eightfold Path. Pañña cannot replace sila and samadhi, no, it goes together with it. Otherwise sila and samadhi are not of the eightfold Path. Take sila: the guarding of the doorways: by being aware of the objects appearing through the six doors. That is satipatthana, or in other words, the development of the eightfold Path. Samadhi: this becomes stronger in the course of insight, by conditions. Not by one's will. When lokuttara citta arises, samadhi has the strength of the first stage of jhana. Calm grows as defilements are eradicated stage by stage. I just see your post to Howard: I think we are seeing eye to eye here:-)) Quote: Nina: You will see that Kh stresses what is also in the suttas: > seeing and the defilements arising on account of visible object. We > keep on seeing persons or things in the visible object. Or we cling > to my seeing. We fail to consider them as impersonal elements and > this gives rise to a great deal of akusala. > > James: Yes, you point to something here that I want to address: Why > does A. Sujin seem to place so much importance on `seeing'? N: You raise good points. When reading the suttas, seeing which sees visible object is mentioned first. I am glad Kh Sujin stresses seeing, we cling immediately to the world and the people in it we believe we see. We proliferate endlessly about what we see. (B.T.W. proliferation is a translation of papañca and this stands mostly for three ways of clinging to self. We cling to the idea of self without wrong view, with wrong view or with conceit.) Visible object, an element, impinges on eyesense, another element, and this conditions seeing, which only knows what is visible, nothing else. Seeing is a mental element, the faculty of knowing. Because of wrong remembrance of self or person we wrongly believe that we see persons, the whole world, and they seem to be lasting. After seeing, often defilements follow in its train. I find it is particularly through eyes that I have wrong ideas about permanence instead of impermanence. People do not arise and fall away, we can only think of them as subject to decay and death. Through the development of insight the arising and falling away of elements can be realized. Not people or I, but visible object, seeing, sound, hearing, etc. J: Why not > place equal importance on the other sense doors, as the Buddha > does? N: I agree. Understanding should be developed of all dhammas appearing through six doors. J: From my understanding, seeing is the most neutral of the five > senses. The other senses (taste, smell, hearing, and touch) bring > up the strongest reactions of like and dislike and thus craving. N: Well, see above. It can also be a personal matter. J: Why not often close your eyes and focus on where most of the problem > lies? N: The Buddha tells us to know seeing and visible object as it is. And also to know the dhammas appearing naturally through the other doorways. I have no inclination to exclude one doorway. For me personally this is not natural. How could I know my defilements if I close one doorway? Now a sutta: K.S. IV, Ch 3, on the all, § 25 abandoning: Nina. 39521 From: Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 6:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts In a message dated 12/6/2004 7:15:06 PM Pacific Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: Hi Andrew, The Buddha also mentioned archers a couple of times in the Suttas when it was appropriate to make a point. Do we therefore conclude that archery is a key to understanding the Buddha's teaching? Of course not. I put ontological issues in the same bucket as archery. Metta, Rob M :-) Hi Rob I disagree. I think that once archery is fully understood, then reality is fully understood, and then suffering is overcome. Archery has been a very overlooked issue in Buddhist analysis its high time that it gets its due. I mean after all, shooting an arrow through the air and then outrunning it? It doesn't get any more real that that! TG 39522 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 0:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] objects of satipatthana Hi Larry, yes, way 21,22, I wrote in my book (p. 51) and I also jotted down the Subco, but it takes time to dig this up. Nina. op 07-12-2004 06:35 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > In Soma Thera's "Way of Mindfulness" see pages 32 and 33, commentary on > "kaayaanupassi". This will be in dsg archives under "way 21" and "way > 22", I think. However, escribe is off-line right now. If you can locate > the time frame these were posted Nina had some comments as well. > > SS Commentary: "In the body there is no contemplation of a uniform > thing, apart from the big and small members of the body, or of a man or > of a woman, apart from such things like the hair of the head and the > hair of the body." 39523 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 0:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Dear Ken O, This is very clearly stated. People ask: is khandha a reality or concept and this is a clear answer. Nina. op 07-12-2004 10:40 schreef Ken O op ashkenn2k@y...: > In the same way, when Buddha talks about the three roots, where > are they in the aggregates. They are in the sankhara aggregates. > They exist but the collective is used to organise them for teaching > of the dhamma. There is no contradiction, what Buddha says that > sankhara exist as aggregates and what Acariya does is that this > collection is a heap (as aggregates is known as a heap etc) and > should not be mistaken as a reality. I think what Acariya is saying > that it should be known as a heap of ultimate realities and sankhara > is just a term used in this context for teaching purposes and not to > be mistaken as ultimate reality. 39524 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 0:02pm Subject: Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Concept ...) Hi Howard, because of lack of time I take out only one point. op 07-12-2004 19:39 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > The eightfold noble path > , a reality, cannot be a paramattha dhamma, can it N: They are cetasikas, sankhaarakkhandha. Nina. 39525 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 0:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 157 ), pure citta Dear Htoo, op 07-12-2004 10:42 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > In this dhamma molecule, one atom is 'citta' which is pure, luminous, > sinless. N: I appreciate this reminder more and more. Also Rob M differentiated citta and citta with cetasikas. At first I did not understand it so well, but I recently listened to a discussion in India. A. Sujin said that citta is just the faculty of knowing (manindriya), that it is pure, pandara. We can understand this in considering seeing that cognizes visible object. There are not yet akusala cetasikas or sobhana cetasikas. The latter cause citta to be akusala citta or kusala citta at the moments of javana. We were talking about it whether we can realize now lobha and she said: there is all the time the idea of my lobha. This shows that it is difficult to directly know akusala cetasikas and sobhana cetasikas, but understanding can begin. But first I think it important to know more clearly the faculty of knowing and rupa which does not know anything. I find citta which is pure such a good reminder now. Nina. 39526 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 0:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Letter to B.Bodhi-'The Jhânas and the Lay Disciple ..' Dear Sarah, It is useful to see the points here, I also listened to them on my own tape. Just a remark about the word jhaana: jhaayati has two different stems. One is to burn, sskr: k.saay, and one is to shine, perceive, contemplate, sskr: dhyaayati. See PED. Both meanings can be used for aramma.nuu-panijjhaana. op 07-12-2004 10:18 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...: > 5.In some contexts we also have to keep in mind the two meanings of jhana > – one referring to the object which can ‘burn away’ the defilements > (aramma.nuu-panijjhaana)and the other which develops with satipatthana > (lakkha.nuupjijhaana). 39527 From: Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 7:20am Subject: Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... Hi, all - Something additional has occurred to me. Among the things that I pointed out as realities that are not paramattha dhammas are anatta, paticcasamupada, and general conditionality and all the relations set forth in the Patthana. Other less noble existents whose ontological status is weaker are those "things" knowable only by conceptualization, such as trees, tables, chariots, and persons. Note that *all* the foregoing are conditioned mind-door objects. And none of them is a member of any khandha. This suggests to me that the breakdown of the content of experience into sense door & sense object pairs (or sense door & sense object & sense consciousness triples) is more far-reaching than the five-khandha breakdown. Included among the mind-door objects are all the realities that I have pointed out as not belonging to any of the five khandhas, and nibbana as well, the one non-khandhic paramattha dhamma. Along these lines, note how the Buddha defined "the all" in the Sabba Sutta. He did *not* use the khandha breakdown there. There the Buddha defines "the all" as follows: "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, *the mind & mental phenomena. This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." With metta, Howard * Note: This was taken from ATI except at this point. Thanissaro Bhikkhu wrote "intellect & ideas" here, but I substituted Bhikkhu Bodhi's "the mind & mental phenomena," which I prefer. /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39528 From: Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 7:25am Subject: Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... Hi, Nina - In a message dated 12/7/04 3:10:48 PM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: > > Hi Howard, > because of lack of time I take out only one point. > op 07-12-2004 19:39 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > > >The eightfold noble path > >, a reality, cannot be a paramattha dhamma, can it > N: They are cetasikas, sankhaarakkhandha. > Nina. > ====================== What is the "they" you are referring to, Nina? With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39529 From: m. nease Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 0:29pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: renunciation Hi Nina, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nina van Gorkom" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 10:54 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: renunciation > renunciation, nekkhamma, I just looked into the Co. of Digha Nikaya, > Sangiti > sutta (the threes, p. 987): all kusala are nekkhamma, Sabbe pi kusalaa > dhammaa nekkhamma-dhaatu ti aya.m nekkhamma-dhaatu. Thus, a very wide > meaning. You renounce akusala, clinging to your own confort and pleasures. > It includes selflessness. > There are many gems in the Recital (Sangiti) sutta and Co, Mike, you > should > read it. This text is not too difficult and you can read it in very small > portions. Yes, it all depends on context I guess. I've read the Sangitisutta; is the commentary available on the internet? mike 39530 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 1:08pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Giving a Smile Friend Ken O, Hmmm...I'm not sure where this discussion is heading. I wanted to defend B. Bodhi's statements about dana and now it is starting to veer off into being a monk or not and the development of the perfections. This may be my last response. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > Hi Friend James > > > J: Just because renunciation requires alobha and dana requires > alobha, that doesn't make renunciation dana. They are still two > different things. Giving alms to a monk and actually being a monk > are two very different things. > > K: definitely they are two things, we are not asking you to > relinquish to become a monk. Relinquishment can be in terms of sense > pleasure etc. Anyway it is not a stretch of logic, lobha is > sometimes known as genorisity while lobha is known as greed. Surely there must be a typo here. Lobha can't be known as both generosity and greed. I think you mean that alobha is sometimes known as generosity. Well, okay, so what? That still doesn't make it part of the Noble Eightfold Path. Are we going in circles here or what? ;-)) > > > > > This supports what I have been saying, Dana will result in a > > favorable state of existence, not necessarily enlightenment. > > k: Sorry this is part of Buddha perfection, it is needed for > perfection of a Buddha. Without it as a base, it is difficult to > shed the attachment to self view, to conceit. Again, we are not talking about the perfections to create a Buddha, we are talking about the path factors of the Noble Eightfold Path, which is designed to create arahants and not specifically Buddhas. > > > > This is again a stretch in logic. If this were true, then the > > Noble Eightfold Path would only be for the creation of Buddhas. > > k: You did not see what I say, only Buddha prefected it while the > rest dont. Why dont you give me any paramis that is not in the 8NP. Sorry, I don't want to go into a deep analysis of the paramis. We have already gotten way off the track here. However, to summarize, the ten paramis are those qualities which a Buddha must perfect over countless lifetimes in order to become an enlightened Buddha. The Noble Eightfold Path is the quicker route to enlightenment and will result in an arahant, not a fully enlightened Buddha (unless the paramis were perfected previousl). Sure, there are some qualities that are in both the paramis and the Noble Eightfold Path: like renunciation and wisdom. But there are also some qualities listed in the Paramis that are not in the Noble Eightfold Path: like Dana and Metta. That is as deep as I am going to go into it. > > > Ken O Metta, James 39531 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 1:57pm Subject: Re: kusala and akusala. Friend Nina, Well, this is a very exciting response because we are beginning to agree on many key issues! (Actually, I prefer to agree than to disagree). I want to just focus on one thing you state, where we still have disagreement, and see what happens: Nina: The Buddha tells us to know seeing and visible object as it is. And also to know the dhammas appearing naturally through the other doorways. I have no inclination to exclude one doorway. For me personally this is not natural. How could I know my defilements if I close one doorway? James: Okay, here is where we get to the important issue: Nina, can you direct your cittas to ignore the input from any of the doorways? Now, don't answer if you have, could you? If you can't, then you are at the mercy of your senses, you don't have any control, the defilements are multiplying by the minute, and wisdom isn't really growing. To my understanding, the point of satipathanna is to gain control of the sense doors. You state here that the Buddha stated to know the dhammas appearing `naturally' through the doorways. I don't believe he stated that. He said to guard the doorways, to have control over them. In other words, don't let just any sense objects get in and, of those senses that do come in, don't let the mind expand upon them with mental proliferation and craving. Now, I brought up the point of closing the eyes because it is a useful technique to limit the sensory input until the mind is able to gain some control. Later, when the mind is firmly established with the ability to guard the senses, there would be no reason to close the eyes. Then one's daily life would be like a meditation. Personally, I am not even close to being at that point!! ;-)) If you are, congratulations! But cut us `less developed' some slack! ;-) Metta, James 39532 From: ericlonline Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 2:22pm Subject: Re: kusala and akusala. Hey Nina, > Nina: The Buddha tells us to know seeing and visible object as it > is. And also to know the dhammas appearing naturally through the > other doorways. I have no inclination to exclude one doorway. For me personally this is not natural. You sleep with your eyes open? N>How could I know my defilements if I > close one doorway? Doors opened or closed, what is the difference? Defilements defile in the mind. PEACE E 39533 From: Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 9:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi, James (and Nina) - In a message dated 12/7/04 4:58:55 PM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > You state here that the Buddha stated to know the dhammas > appearing `naturally' through the doorways. I don't believe he > stated that. He said to guard the doorways, to have control over > them. In other words, don't let just any sense objects get in and, > of those senses that do come in, don't let the mind expand upon them > with mental proliferation and craving. > ===================== I believe that what the Buddha called guarding the senses actually came down to guarding only one sense, the mind. This, I believe is what right effort is about. The point was not to censor or control what sense data enter the various sense doors, but to monitor the mind with regard to its qualitities and activities, so that akusala qualities and activities not yet arisen are avoided, akusala ones already arisen are abandoned, kusala ones not yet arisen are encouraged, and kusala ones already arisen are sustained and increased. The critical occasions for doing this are when content arises at any sense door. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39534 From: connieparker Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 3:33pm Subject: Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... Hi, Howard, H: The eightfold noble path, a reality, cannot be a paramattha dhamma, can it N: They are cetasikas, sankhaarakkhandha. H: What is the "they" you are referring to, Nina? SPD: The factors of the eightfold Path are the following cetasikas: right understanding (sammaa-di.t.thi, pa~n~naa cetasika), right thinking (sammaa-sankappa, vitakka cetasika), right speech (sammaa-vaaca cetasika), right action (sammaa-kammanta cetasika), right livelihood (sammaa-aajiiva cetasika), right effort (sammaa-vaayaama, viriya cetasika), right mindfulness (sammaa-sati, sati cetasika) and right concentration (sammaa-samaadhi, ekaggataa cetasika). peace, connie 39535 From: Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 3:36pm Subject: Vism.XIV,122 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 122. (m) At the end of the impulsions, if the object is a very vivid one52 in the five doors, or is clear in the mind door, then in sense-sphere beings at the end of sense-sphere impulsions resultant consciousness occurs through any condition it may have obtained such as previous kamma, impulsion consciousness, etc., with desirable, etc., object53. [It occurs thus] as one among the eight sense-sphere resultant kinds with root cause (42)-(49) or the three resultant mind-consciousness elements without root-cause (40), (41), (56), and it [does so] twice or once, following after the impulsions that have impelled, and with respect to an object other than the life-continuum's object, like some of the water that follows a little after a boat going upstream. Though ready to occur with the life-continuum's object after the impulsions have ended, it nevertheless occurs making the impulsions' object its object. Because of that it is called 'registration' (tadaaramma.na--lit. 'having-that-as-its-object'). This is how the occurrence of eleven kinds of resultant consciousness should be understood as registration. ------------------------------ Note 52. ' "A very vivid one" is one with a life of sixteen consciousness moments. For registration consciousness arises with respect to that, not with respect to any other. "Clear" means very evident, and that is only in the sense sphere; for registration arises with respect to that' (Pm. 479). Note 53. ' "Previous kamma": this is said in order to show the differences in kinds of registration; for kamma that generates rebirth-linking is not the only kind to generate registration; other kinds of kamma do so too. But the later generates registration unlike that generatable by the kamma that generates rebirth-liking. "Impulsion consciousness": this is said in order to show what defines the registration; for it is said, "Registration is definable by impulsion" (?). The word "etc." includes rebirth-linking, however; for that is not a condition for registration that is more outstanding than itself. "Any condition": any condition from among the desirable objects, etc., that has combined (samaveta) to produce the arising of registration' (Pm. 479). 39536 From: Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 11:29am Subject: Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... Hi, Connie - In a message dated 12/7/04 6:35:55 PM Eastern Standard Time, connieparker@i... writes: > Hi, Howard, > > H: The eightfold noble path, a reality, cannot be a paramattha dhamma, > can it > N: They are cetasikas, sankhaarakkhandha. > H: What is the "they" you are referring to, Nina? > SPD: The factors of the eightfold Path are the following cetasikas: > right understanding (sammaa-di.t.thi, pa~n~naa cetasika), right thinking > (sammaa-sankappa, vitakka cetasika), right speech (sammaa-vaaca cetasika), > right action (sammaa-kammanta cetasika), right livelihood (sammaa-aajiiva > cetasika), right effort (sammaa-vaayaama, viriya cetasika), right > mindfulness (sammaa-sati, sati cetasika) and right concentration > (sammaa-samaadhi, ekaggataa cetasika). > peace, > connie > > =========================== Thank you, Connie. Perhaps the path factors are - though I question that, as you will see below - but the path, itself, is certainly not. Nonetheless, the path is a reality - it is not imagined. The term 'reality' is not applied broadly enough - it should not be identified with the paramattha dhammas. Now, a separate matter is that of whether the path factors really are all cetasikas. In several cases, one has to strain, squirm, and contort to see it that way. The path factors that I do not see as paramattha dhammas unless one takes them to mean something quite different from what they are called and different from how they are talked about in the suttas themselves, are the following: right thinking or intention or resolve (This is specifically defined by the Buddha as "Being resolved on renunciation, on freedom from ill-will, on harmlessness), and hence, it consists of several things, and so is not a paramattha dhamma), right speech (speech is a conventional phenomenon), right action (conventional - the Buddha defines it as follows: "Abstaining from taking life, abstaining from stealing, abstaining from unchastity," which makes this also consist of several phenomena, and thus not a paramattha dhamma), right livelihood (livelihood is a conventional phenomenon, and the Buddha specifies which livelihoods are wrong), and right effort (the Buddha defines this as consisting of several conventional activities - four to be exact, and it is thus not a paramattha dhamma). With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39537 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 5:34pm Subject: Message from new member Ratanamata The message below, sent to Sarah and me, was I think meant for the list so I am forwarding it. Jon ***************************************** --- mayallbehappy wrote: Merry meet Sarah and Jonothan Abbott. May we and all our relatives be safe and secure May we and all our relatives be happy at heart May we and all our relatives want to prevent and abandon doings that lead to someones downfall. May we and all our relatives want to do doings that lead to blessings. ... Itivuttaka 98. {Iti III.49; Iti 98} Translator Rev. Thanissaro Bhikkhu. Put available by John Bullit. For free distribution only. This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have heard: "There are these two kinds of gifts: a gift of material things & a gift of the Dhamma. Of the two, this is supreme: a gift of the Dhamma. There are these two kinds of sharing: sharing of material things & sharing of the Dhamma. Of the two, this is supreme: sharing of the Dhamma. There are these two kinds of assistance: assistance with material things & assistance with the Dhamma. Of the two, this is supreme: help with the Dhamma." This is the meaning of what the Blessed One said and in regard to this was it said; The gift he describes as foremost & unsurpassed, the sharing the Blessed One has extolled: who -- confident in the supreme field of merit, wise, discerning -- wouldn't give it at appropriate times? Both for those who proclaim it and those who listen, confident in the message of the One Well-gone: it purifies their foremost benefit -- those heeding the message of the One Well-gone. This too is the meaning of what the BLessed One said so I have heard. Revised: Wednesday 2004.11.10 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/khuddaka/iti/iti3.html Itivuttaka 26. {Iti I.26; Iti 18} Translator Rev. Thanissaro Bhikkhu. Put available by John Bullit. This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have heard: "If beings knew, as I know, the results of giving & sharing, they would not eat without having given, nor would the stain of selfishness overcome their minds. Even if it were their last bite, their last mouthful, they would not eat without having shared, if there were someone to receive their gift. But because beings do not know, as I know, the results of giving & sharing, they eat without having given. The stain of selfishness overcomes their minds." This is the meaning of what the Blessed One said and in regard to this was it said; If beings knew what the Great Seer said, how the result of sharing has such great fruit, then, subduing the stain of selfishness with brightened awareness, they'd give in season to the noble ones, where a gift bears great fruit. Having given food as an offering to those worthy of offerings, many donors, when they pass away from here, the human state, go to heaven. They, having gone there to heaven, rejoice, enjoying sensual pleasures. Unselfish, they partake of the result of sharing. This too is the meaning of what the Blessed One said so I have heard. Revised: Wednesday 2004.11.10 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/khuddaka/iti/iti1.html Success, I know that you can do it too. May all beings be safe and secure. May all beings be happy at heart. May all beings want to do doings that lead to blessings. May all beings want to prevent and abandon doings that lead to someones downfall. with mudita Ratanamata 39538 From: Andrew Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 5:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: [snip] > dear RobM, > I have no idea what ontolgical statements are or why you think they > are important or not important. You say that there is no support in > the texts for saying that "what is reality > > (dhamma) and what is not is stressed throught the teachings" > yet then you seem to change that and say that in fact the Buddha did > say so on one occasion? (I am trying to infer this from your > statement about ontologies)? Hi Rob K My Dict of Philosophy says of ontology: "the branch of metaphysical enquiry concerned with the study of existence itself (considered apart from the nature of any existent object). It differentiates between 'real existence' and 'appearance' and investigates the different ways in which entities belonging to various logical categories (physical objects, numbers, universals, abstractions etc) may be said to exist." IMHO this is an area you either eschew or weigh into (unless you say you are using it only as some sort of 'technique' without actually committing yourself to existence/nonexistence). We know that the Buddha did not eschew ontology. In fact, he weighed into it by declaring certain things existent. Period. You can't be half pregnant. Sorry, folks, but at the moment I am finding it very hard to see that differentiating between 'real existence' and 'appearance' isn't central to the Dhamma. What I obviously need to ponder more on is "How does the Dhamma look and feel if you take ontology out". Rob M is a person who has devoted a great deal of time and energy to Dhamma study and I refuse to take his conclusions lightly. Back to the pondering board ... I hope all is well with you in Japan, Rob K. Best wishes Andrew 39539 From: Antony Woods Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 8:27pm Subject: Guarding the sense doors (was: Re: kusala and akusala) Dear Howard, Please allow me to enter this thread. I disagree. I think that voluntary censorship of the sense doors is very important to maintaining one’s equanimity especially I think this would be with practising the samatha jhanas. Vipassana may be another matter. My Satipatthana Vipassana teacher once said that lust would still come up again after practising guarding the sense doors which he said was “another practice”. I found this sutta quote which seems to apply to guarding the sense doors: (the terms in brackets are from Bhikkhus’ Bodhi and Nanamoli translation) “It was said, “Sariputta, forms cognizable by eye consciousness are also twofold those that should be followed (cultivated) and not followed” On account of what was it said by the Blessed One? Venerable sir, when following certain forms cognizable by eye consciousness, demerit (unwholesome states) increases and merit (wholesome states) decreases, such forms should not be followed when following certain forms cognizable by eye consciousness, demerit decreases and merit increases, such forms should be followed. It was said, “Sariputta, forms cognizable by eye consciousness too are twofold, those that should be followed and not followed.” It was said on account of this.” (similarly for the other senses) http://www.mahindarama.com/e-tipitaka/Majjhima%20Nikaya/mn-114.htm In Majjhima 91 it says: “(Buddha) does not walk looking about” In “In This Very Life” by Sayadaw U Pandita (which is almost all available online) p215: “The ex-bhikkhu (new deva) was afraid even to set foot inside the gate of his mansion. He knew his strength of mind would not last against these pleasures, far more intense than those of our human world.” Mahasi Sayadaw taught: (1) Where visible objects remain unseen, there //kilesa// ceases by itself. (2) Where visible objects are seen there //kilesa// lies in wait. And he quoted the Buddha: "How do you answer this, Malukyaputta? Answer me as best you can. There are certain tangible objects which you have never touched previously, either in the immediate or remote past, or at the present moment. Neither can you hope to touch them in the future. Can such objects arouse desire, lust and affection in you?" Malukyaputta replied this in the negative. This is as it should be. Here it may again be emphasised that no //kilesa// can arise for sense-objects with which one is not familiar.” http://www.buddhanet.net/filelib/medbud/mahasimk.zip ===== I no longer believe that Satipatthana Vipassana is “choiceless awareness”. I like Ajahn Brahmavamso’s humorous use of the simile for mindfulness of a person who's guarding a door or guarding a gate. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eightfold-l/message/3013 I am motivated to research this topic if people are interested. Maybe one day I’ll get an entry in the “Useful Posts” May you be well and happy, Antony. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: >Hi, James (and Nina) - > >In a message dated 12/7/04 4:58:55 PM Eastern Standard Time, >buddhatrue@y... writes: > > > You state here that the Buddha stated to know the dhammas > appearing >`naturally' through the doorways. I don't believe he > stated that. He >said to guard the doorways, to have control over > them. In other words, >don't let just any sense objects get in and, > of those senses that do come >in, don't let the mind expand upon them > with mental proliferation and >craving. > > ===================== > I believe that what the Buddha called guarding the senses actually >came down to guarding only one sense, the mind. This, I believe is what >right effort is about. The point was not to censor or control what sense >data enter the various sense doors, but to monitor the mind with regard to >its qualitities and activities, so that akusala qualities and activities >not yet arisen are avoided, akusala ones already arisen are abandoned, >kusala ones not yet arisen are encouraged, and kusala ones already arisen >are sustained and increased. The critical occasions for doing this are when >content arises at any sense door. > >With metta, >Howard > 39540 From: Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 8:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Andrew, Re: "How does the Dhamma look and feel if you take ontology out". If an insight arises that a feeling is not self, does that insight have anything to do with ontology? Similarly, if there is a belief in self one could argue that that belief is wrong on ontological grounds or one could look directly and see that belief in self is not self. Ontological arguments are useful but they aren't real. Larry 39541 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 8:41pm Subject: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Friend Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: I believe that what the Buddha called guarding the senses actually > came down to guarding only one sense, the mind. > With metta, > Howard If that is what the Buddha meant that is what he would have said. He said guarding the senses, plural. Guarding means deciding what will enter and what won't. I am not convinced by your argument. Metta, James 39542 From: Andrew Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 8:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > Re: "How does the Dhamma look and feel if you take ontology out". > > If an insight arises that a feeling is not self, does that insight have > anything to do with ontology? > > Similarly, if there is a belief in self one could argue that that belief > is wrong on ontological grounds or one could look directly and see that > belief in self is not self. Ontological arguments are useful but they > aren't real. Hi Larry I think your point is too subtle and has gone over my head, sorry. When the Buddha said "feeling ... I too say that it exists" (see Rob K's post 39350), he was using an ontological argument. He took an ontological position that feeling, among other things, exists. In other suttas, he may have said "feeling is not-self". But if the true Dhamma says that feeling exists, surely insight (at least the full understanding of abandoning or 'pahanaparinna) must know this? Best wishes Andrew 39543 From: plnao Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 9:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Guarding the sense doors (was: Re: kusala and akusala) Hi James, Howard, Antony and all I'm very interested in deepening my understanding of guarding the sense doors. > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > I believe that what the Buddha called guarding the > senses actually > > came down to guarding only one sense, the mind. > > > With metta, > > Howard > > If that is what the Buddha meant that is what he would have said. > He said guarding the senses, plural. Guarding means deciding what > will enter and what won't. I am not convinced by your argument. > > Metta, James I believe I have benefited in some areas from experimenting with a strict "one plough's length" approach to the sense doors. I could babble at length about how, but I'll spare you for now. On the other hand, the other day I found this sutta passage, and came to a similar conclusion to Howard, that "guarding the sense doors" does not always mean averting the eyes, for example, but can have to do more with what follows through the mind. Here is that passage from, AN IV 37: "And how does a monk guard the doors to his sense faculties? There is the case where a monk, on seeing a form with the eye, does not grasp at any theme or variations by which- if he were to dwell without restraint over the faculty of the eye -- evil, unskillful qualities such as greed or distress might assail him. He practices with restrain. He guards the faculty of the eye. He achieves restrain with regard to the faculty of the eye." (end quote) This "grasp at any theme or variations by which...evil unskillful qualities...might assail him" would seem to indicate mental processes that following the initial seeing, wouldn't you agree? I think of the monk who "stops at seeing" , the one who saw the beautiful woman as "teeth walking by" instead of proliferating about her. The monk didn't avert his eyes in that case. He saw the woman. But it stopped there. Mental proliferation didn't take over. So I would guess "guarding the sense doors" can refer both to literally averting the eyes and to right attention that prevents unwholesome proliferation based on what is seen. Again, I suspect that those of us with very gross defilements can benefit more from a "one plough's length" approach, but as insight deepens, we can look, and see and come closer to stopping right there. Very interesting and important topic, for sure. Look forward to discussing it more with you. Metta, Phil 39544 From: Ken O Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 9:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Giving a Smile Hi Friend James Thanks for correcting my typo error, it should be alobha as generosity :). It is ok then we can stop this thing anytime :). Since you read a lot on Buddhism, why dont you read the ancient texts, they are full of gem. You never known that all the questions you have are actually in the texts. Ken O 39546 From: Ken O Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 9:47pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi Friend James To me, guarding has a few meanings. One of the meaning I like is wise attention. Ken O 39547 From: plnao Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 10:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] I tried it and liked it! (was Re: Bhante and Smiling ) Dear Bhante Vimalaramsi Thank you again for your thoughtful encouragement. I really appreciate it. Bhante > Then when you said: "So if I "recognize that an unwholesome > state has arisen", that recognizing is in itself a wholesome state. It is > a small step towards detachment from the unwholesome state. When I > regenerated the smile and the pleasant feeling, it was - in my opinion at > this time- a lunge away from insight towards comfort." Bhante*** Isn't > comfort another way of saying that there is no more suffering? This is a very important question that I find myself thinking a lot these days. At this point, I would have to say no, because there are many ways to find comfort that just intensify our need for comfort, like an addiction. To use a very crude example, think of turning the stove up every time you feel cold, and thereby feeling comfortable - and then what would the result be if you ran out of heating oil for the stove? The suffering from the cold would be much worse than if you had sat patiently with it. So for a moment, yes, no more suffering, but in the long run more suffering when we seek comfort moment by moment. Perhaps? Yesterday I was in a *very foul mood* when I got up. I had had a bad day at work the day before, and a quarrel with my wife when I got home. I overslept. And got up and got my coffee and as usual sat on a cushion by the balcony door. (Even though I have not been meditating, I sit on a cushion to study suttas.) I sensed what a foul mood I was in and thought of your recommended practice. I remembered how good it had felt, how warm. So I started to do it. But then I stopped myself, suddenly. I just didn't want to try to generate a smile out of such a foul mood. I know I could - I used to do a lot of visualization before I came to Buddhism and I was always quite good at generating pleasant images - and I knew that if I did it would make for a more pleasant day. But I stopped myself. And thought of my favourite sutta these days, from Samyutta Nikaya. (SN XXXV.12, if I'm not mistaken.) I quote: "Just as in the sky above winds of various kinds are blowing....coming from the east or west, blowing from the north or south, some carrying dust and other not, cold are some and other hot, some are fierce and others mild- their blowing is so different. So also in this body here, feelings of different kinds come, the pleasant feelings, and the painful ones and the neutral ones. But if a monk is aware(? ?I'm copying this from a scribbled notebook entry) and does not neglect to practice mindfulness and comprehension clear the nature of all feelings will be understood. And having penetrated them he will be taint-free in this very life." This encouraged me. My foul mood would pass, just as the cold winter wind surely passes and gives way to a warm spring breeze. My fool mood was not self, it was not me. I didn't get rid of my foul mood- I was in a fairly bad mood all day- but at the same time I had a confident, detached feeling, a sense of gratitude to the Buddha who teaches the way of liberation. I think you're a very compassionate man, Bhante. You've taken care of the sick and dying and helped them to find peace and comfort. And this shows in the practice you teach. I have been thinking recently, however, that happiness in this lifetime through emotional well-being, and liberation from samsara through the development of insight cannot not, alas, be one and the same thing. I hate to say it, but the old gym axiom "no pain, no gain" might apply to developing insight. All middle way, of course. Of course we will have more emotional well-being through the Buddha's teaching than we would without. But I don't think we should practice in a way that leads us to want to have it all the time. >And if one > follows the entire instruction given about Right Effort there has to be > more than just the recognizing of a wholesome state, it says that one > develops it by staying with that wholesome state and the smile is a tool > that makes this easier to do. This is not a "lunge away from insight, but > towards it. Why? Because it helps one to stay aware and mindful of what > is happening in the present moment. I am leaning towards what is often called here a "descriptive" understanding of right effort. When a wholesome state is maintained, it is because wisdom has arisen in a way that guides us to maintaining it. I don't feel - at this time- that this maintaining is to be taken as maintaining it by will power. But I'm just a beginner and go back and forth on this one. I *did* experience what you said about seeing the smile come and go as a kind of helfpul mindfulness exercise, of what is hapening in the present moment. In that sense, it would be similar to coming back to the breath, wouldn't it? And I have read in your other posts about how you say we can understand Dependent Origination through the meditation you practice. So I have not really done justice to the insight side of the meditation you teach. I'm sure I'm still oversimplifying, so forgive me for that. > > I find it interesting that many people don't see that greed (lobha) and > aversion (dosa) are the same thing, they are both attachments but are > different sides of the same coin. If one has a strong dislike to > something they are just as attached to that dislike, just like when one > has strong greed. The only difference is the kind of feeling that > accompanies it. It is either lobha or dosa but the attachment to it is > the same. One kind of attachment is "Hey, I like this and want more" and > the other kind of attachment is "Hey, I really don't like this, I want it > to go away". This is the attachment to a belief that either the pleasant > feeling or the painful feeling is "Mine" and this is atta not anatta. Yes, there is always lobha behind dosa. So rather than saying that they are the same, couldn't it be said that dosa gives way to lobha, to attachment to the pleasant thing in order to be done with the unpleasant one? "Hey I really don't like this, I want it to go away" (dosa) becomes "give me back that that goodfeeling" (lobha) I guess this is why I chose to spend the day with my bad mood instead of smiling it away. Seeing the painful feeling, becoming more aquatined with it,knowing it as anatta, gaining some detachment from it. All middle way, of course. I'm not advocating going cold turkey on comfort. > When you said: "It did for me, but in my case I felt that putting the > smile back did not indicate a wholesome mental state but rather an > unwholesome one, an attachment to pleasant feeling." Bhante*** And > therein lies the problem because I said that the person also wishes > happiness along with the smile and just because a pleasant feeling > arises, it doesn't mean that this is unwholesome. It all comes down to > the individual and their own perspective. The sincere smile and the > making of the wish for happiness, changes the whole process away from a > personal self doing something to an impersonal wish for happiness. And > this is wholesome. It takes more than just pasting a smile on one's face, > it takes sincere effort to make a wish for well being and happiness in an > impersonal way. At that time, mind is free from defilements and it is > wholesome. I think this may help you. Yes, it all depends on the sincerity of the smile, of the cittas involved. In the case I described above, it would have been about self-comfort, escaping from dosa. I will continue reflecting on this practice, experimenting with it, Bhante. As I said before, it was really silly of me to make comments about it after trying it only once, and just about as silly after only twice. So I expect this will be my last comments, for awhile. Let me sit with it and see what happens. :) > > When you said: "I can see this. I'm thinking these days that I will be > returning to the > meditation cushion one day soon for another go at insight meditation." > Bhante*** This makes joy and a smile arise in me, thank you. (snip) It makes me very happy to think that you will begin doing some sitting > practice again and please remember that this is only your quiet time to > watch how mind works very intensely. The whole of one's life is > meditation as you are already observing. Thank you again, it makes me > smile lots. One thing I tell my students before they go out into their > daily life is to be happy and smile. Thank you Bhante. I am smiling right now. Metta, Phil p.s thanks also for your explanation re the different kinds of joy, and re chanda. 39548 From: robmoult Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 10:28pm Subject: Re: Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Andrew and Larry, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > > Hi Andrew, > > > > Re: "How does the Dhamma look and feel if you take ontology out". > > > > If an insight arises that a feeling is not self, does that insight > have > > anything to do with ontology? > > > > Similarly, if there is a belief in self one could argue that that > belief > > is wrong on ontological grounds or one could look directly and see > that > > belief in self is not self. Ontological arguments are useful but > they > > aren't real. > > Hi Larry > > I think your point is too subtle and has gone over my head, sorry. > When the Buddha said "feeling ... I too say that it exists" (see Rob > K's post 39350), he was using an ontological argument. He took an > ontological position that feeling, among other things, exists. In > other suttas, he may have said "feeling is not-self". But if the > true Dhamma says that feeling exists, surely insight (at least the > full understanding of abandoning or 'pahanaparinna) must know this? ===== I have fallen way behind in my replies, but let me quickly single this one out. There were a group of thinkers who had the view that nothing exists - nothing is real, everything is an illusion. For example, they might say that everything that we think is real is a dream and some day we will wake up to find it was all an illusion (I haven't seen the Matrix films, but I think that this was the theme). This view is based on ontology. It is appropriate that the Buddha make an ontological statement to refute this view. In SNXXII.94 the Buddha did make his one set of ontological statements to refute the illusionists' wrong view. The Buddha said: - Form that is permanent, stable, eternal, not subject to change: this does not exist - Feeling that is permanent, stable, eternal, not subject to change: this does not exist - Perception that is permanent, stable, eternal, not subject to change: this does not exist - Volitional formations that are permanent, stable, eternal, not subject to change: this does not exist - Consciousness that is permanent, stable, eternal, not subject to change: this does not exist The Buddha then went on to make the following ontological statements: - Form that is impermanent, suffering and subject to change: this does exist - Feeling that is impermanent, suffering and subject to change: this does exist - Perception that is impermanent, suffering and subject to change: this does exist - Volitional formations that are impermanent, suffering and subject to change: this does exist - Consciousness that is impermanent, suffering and subject to change: this does exist In this Sutta, the Buddha did not talk about concepts not existing. What this Sutta shows is that the Buddha was not afraid to make an ontological statement when it was called for (these are Bhikkhu Bodhi's words as well). The Buddha resorted to this ontological statement when dealing with illusionists (doesn't sound like there were too many of them in Ancient India... otherwise the Buddha would have had to repeat the same message multiple times. Of course, they hadn't seen The Matrix yet :-) ). In this Sutta, was the Buddha talking about "ultimate realities" in the sense of the Abhidhammattha Sangaha? According to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, "volitional formations" is a collection of "ultimate realities", not an "ultimate reality" itself. To say that it is core to the Buddha's teaching that we divide things into "realities" and "concepts" and treat them differently doesn't make sense. The Mulapariyaya Sutta shows that the mind of the uninstructed worldling treats "realities" and "concepts" the same way. It shows that the mind of the learner treats "realities" and "concepts" the same way. It shows that the mind of the Arahant treats "realities" and "concepts" the same way. It shows that the mind of the Buddha treats "realities" and "concepts" the same way. Dividing things into dhammas is extremely important. Knowing the nature (characterisitic / function / manifestation / proximate cause) of these dhammas is extremely important. Seeing the three characteristics (anicca / dukkha / anatta) of these dhammas is extremely important. Abandoning these dhammas is extremely important. It is interesting to note that, according to the Mulapariyaya Sutta, it is not possible for uninstructed worldings to do all this breaking into dhammas, seeing the nature of dhammas, seeing the characterisitic of dhammas and abandoning dhammas. According to the Mulapariyaya Sutta, learners have the possibility of breaking into dhammas, seeing the nature of dhammas, seeing the characterisitic of dhammas and abandoning dhammas. I assume that this is because this breaking into dhammas, seeing the nature of dhammas, seeing the characterisitic of dhammas and abandoning dhammas requires one to first abandon self-view (something the unistructed worldling has not done but the learner has done). I noticed that the number of "Concept and Reality in Primary Texts" posts was starting to reduce in number. I suspect that this particular message may cause a resurgence :-) Oh well.... Metta, Rob M :-) 39549 From: robmoult Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 10:44pm Subject: Re: Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Ken O, I am behind on a number of posts to you. One of the main reasons is that I am afraid that we are using terminology differently making it difficult to understand each other's points. When I am talking about "ultimate reality", I am referring to the list given in the second verse of the Abhidhammattha Sangaha: - Consciousness (citta) - Mental factors (cetasikas) - Matter (rupa) - Nibbana You are introducing a number of other things such as Dependent Origination, etc. into your definition of "reality". I think that we need to come to an agreement as to what we are defining as "realities" (preferrably with some textual support) before continuing. Another term that I suspect that we are using differently is "directly knowing". I am taking my definition of "directly knowing" from the Mulapariaya Sutta (and its commentary). In my recent message to Andrew and Larry (see extract below), I clarified the meaning of "directly knowing"; it is something that uninstructed worldlings such as us are incapable of doing. It is something that learners (Sotapannas, Sakadagamis, Anagamis) have the potential of doing and it is something that Arahants and Buddhas always do. Ken O, I sincerely want to continue our conversation, but we gotta get this terminology thing sorted out first. Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > > To say that it is core to the Buddha's teaching that we divide > things into "realities" and "concepts" and treat them differently > doesn't make sense. The Mulapariyaya Sutta shows that the mind of > the uninstructed worldling treats "realities" and "concepts" the > same way. It shows that the mind of the learner treats "realities" > and "concepts" the same way. It shows that the mind of the Arahant > treats "realities" and "concepts" the same way. It shows that the > mind of the Buddha treats "realities" and "concepts" the same way. > > Dividing things into dhammas is extremely important. Knowing the > nature (characterisitic / function / manifestation / proximate > cause) of these dhammas is extremely important. Seeing the three > characteristics (anicca / dukkha / anatta) of these dhammas is > extremely important. Abandoning these dhammas is extremely important. > > It is interesting to note that, according to the Mulapariyaya Sutta, > it is not possible for uninstructed worldings to do all this > breaking into dhammas, seeing the nature of dhammas, seeing the > characterisitic of dhammas and abandoning dhammas. According to the > Mulapariyaya Sutta, learners have the possibility of breaking into > dhammas, seeing the nature of dhammas, seeing the characterisitic of > dhammas and abandoning dhammas. I assume that this is because this > breaking into dhammas, seeing the nature of dhammas, seeing the > characterisitic of dhammas and abandoning dhammas requires one to > first abandon self-view (something the unistructed worldling has not > done but the learner has done). 39550 From: robmoult Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 10:47pm Subject: Re: Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Agrios, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "agriosinski" wrote: > > My take on this subject, is that D.O. is Buddhist ontology. > > In western ontology there is question of reality, in D.O. there > is no. > D.O. is showing more dynamic view of what is called reality by westerners. More dynamic by impermanent nature of it. > > That dismissed something like last 15 centuries of philosophy I guess... > ;) Great insight! The more that I think about it, the more sense it makes to me. Makes me want to analyze Dependent Origination in more depth (see my next post to James :-) ). Metta, Rob M :-) 39551 From: robmoult Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 10:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi James, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > It would be even better if you only > engage in discussion about dhammas as they relate to dependent > origination- then the discussions would be most beneficial to all > concerned. Great idea! Agrios' message planted the seed and your message gave it nourishment to grow. This has risen to the top of my "do to" list (once I get out from under this pile of "Concept and Reality in Primary Texts" messages). I am already starting to plan the series.... Metta, Rob M :-) 39552 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 0:11am Subject: Mulapariyaya Sutta - realities? concepts? dhammas? Dear RobM, Greatly appreciating your threads and good humour as always;-).I just went to google to see if the Bodhi translation of the Mulapariyaya Sutta was on line yet (it's not), but was at least referred to an old post of mine with some quotes I can re-cycle here;-). You’ve been referring quite a bit this sutta and how you don’t understand there to be any distinction in terms of the understanding of realities as opposed to concepts being discussed. You have also quoted or referred to the commentary at times, so I appreciate that you refer to these texts and know that they were written long, long before the Abhidammattha Sangaha. In addition to all the good points that others have been making, we could also discuss the sutta again in a lot of detail. Let me just start here with the introduction from it and also the commentary to the introduction as translated by B.Bodhi. From the sutta itself, in the very first paragraph, we read the Buddha as saying: “I will teach you, bhikkhus, the exposition of the root of all things.” (sabbadhammamuulapariyaaya) What do “all things” refer to? We read in the commentary, and sub-commentary notes provided by B.Bodhi about the various meanings of ‘all’ in the suttas. Here it refers to ‘the all of personality (sakkaayasabba)’, i.e. the 5 khandhas which are of course the paramattha dhammas or realities we talk about so much. We read further about the various meanings of dhamma (here translated as ‘things’) in the suttas: *** “Cy. The word “dhamma” is found used in the following senses: the scriptures (pariyatti), the (Four Noble) Truths (sacca), concentration (samaadhi), wisdom (pa~n~na), nature (pakati), things endowed with a specific nature (sabhava), emptiness (su~n~nataa), merit (pu~n~na), a disciplinary offense (aapatti), the knowable (~neyya) etc.” The commentary continues with reference to this particular sutta and the use of “all things” (sabbadhamma) here: “Here the word occurs in the sense of things endowed with a specific nature. This is the word-meaning: “They bear their own characteristics, thus they are dhammas” (attano lakkha.na”m dhaarentii ti dhammaa”. *** S: So we can certainly use ‘dhammas’ instead of realities anytime, as long as we agree that we are referring to the 5 khandhas (and not to concepts or imaginary objects) which 'bear their own characteristics'. This commentary continues with the following details, quoted before: Quote from Sub Cy to Mulapariyaya Sutta, B.Bodhi p32: ***** “They bear their own characteristics”: although there are no dhammas devoid of their own characteristics , this is still said for the purpose of showing that these are mere dhammas endowed with their specific natures devoid of such attributions as that of a “being” etc. "***Whereas such entities as self, beauty, pleasureableness, and permanence, etc, or nature (pakati), substance (dabba), soul (jiva), body etc, which are mere misconstructions (parikappitaakaaramatta) due to craving and views, or such entities as “sky-flowers” etc which are mere expressions of conventional discourse (lokavohaaramatta), cannot be discovered as ultimately real actualities (saccika.t.thaparamatthato), these dhammas(i.e. those endowed with a specific nature) can. "These dhammas are discovered as ultimately real actualities(saccika.t.thaparamatthato).*** ***** S: Note in particular that "“sky-flowers” etc which are mere expressions of conventional discourse (lokavohaaramatta), cannot be discovered as ultimately real actualities (saccika.t.thaparamatthato)..". Here conventional expressions or concepts are clearly distinguished from paramattha dhammas or realities to be directly known. With regard to the use of ‘ultimate realities’ in the suttas, I’d like to requote from a very old post of Robert Eddison’s (again!)as it happens to be in the post of mine that I'm requoting from here: *** Rob Ed: “Are you perhaps referring to paramattha sacca (truth in the highest sense)? If so, I would agree that this term is absent in the Suttas, though I would suggest that the notion is present. That is to say, the idea that something may be true conventionally but not ultimately is inferrable from the Suttas, even though it is expressed in different terms. "What the Commentaries call conventional truth (sammuti-sacca), the Suttas call 'worldly consensus' (lokasamañña), 'worldly language' (lokanirutti), 'worldly usage' (lokavohaara), or 'worldly convention' (lokapaññatti). "What the Commentaries call truth in the highest sense (paramattha-sacca) Is indicated in several ways in the Suttas, but most unambiguously when the Buddha prefaces a statement with "In truth and reality..." (saccato thetato). E.g."....since in truth and reality there obtains neither self nor what Belongs to self...." (Alagadduupama Sutta ) "In truth and reality, here and now the Tathaagata is not to be found [i.e. in the khandhas, apart from the khandhas etc.]." (Yamaka Sutta)” ***** S: Whether we say that ‘hardness is a paramattha dhamma or a reality or a dhamma is not in itself of any importance, as I see It. What is important is the development of awareness and understanding which knows the hardness as it is when it appears. This is the point Ken O has been making forcefully and clearly as I read his posts. So why is there misunderstanding and conceiving with regard to these dhammas (realities) and why are they taken for personality? Because of ‘Craving, conceit, and views, or ignorance, etc.’ on account of these dhammas. Sub Cy “The purport is: all dhammas beginning with earth (pathavi) which function as the bases for conceiving (ma~n~nanaavatthu).” *** S:There is so much more to quote and discuss. Furtheron, the commentary gives the detailed explanation about your point about reference to beings etc as objects of understanding. Without a clear knowledge about dhammas (realities), we’ll always misunderstand such sutta references. The commentary (Bodhi, p.38)refers to the four kinds of teaching by a Buddha: 1) dhamma as subject and dhamma as terms of expression (dhammaadhi.t.thaanaa dhammadesanaa) 2) individuals as subject and dhammas as terms of expression (dhammaadhi.t.thaanaa puggaladesanaa) 3) individuals as subject and individuals as terms of expression (puggalaadhi.t.thaanaa puggaladesanaa 4) dhammas as subject and individuals as terms of expression (puggalaadhi.t.thaanaa dhammadesanaa) Examples of each are given. For example, for the first one, 1) we read: "There are, bhikkhus, these three feelings. What are the three? Pleasant feeling, painful feeling, and neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling" (S.36:11) - this is a teaching that has dhammas as subject and dhammas as terms of expression." For the last one, no 4), we read: “What, bhikkhus, is the fear of a bad destination? Herein, bhikkhus, someone reflects: ‘The result of bodily misconduct in the life to come is evil” (AN, 4:12) – this is a teaching that has dhammas as subject and individuals as *terms of expression*.” In the examples you gave about beings, devas etc, again the teaching is about dhammas as subject and individuals as *terms of expression*. Is it surprising that we often misunderstand suttas such as the Mulapariyaya Sutta? No. Even the bhikkhus who listened to the Buddha teaching it specifically for them, were not gladdened, due to mana (conceit) as they listened and ‘conceived’ accordingly on account of the dhammas heard, but the Buddha knew they would still benefit and it would provide the groundwork for them to be able to really appreciate the Truths later. Metta, Sarah ===== 39553 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 1:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] Value of discussion (was evil thoughts) Dear Bhante, Thank you for taking the time to respond and all your good wishes. I do understand that some of the ideas or views that I and a few others express here may seem far from the ‘practical’ understanding you appreciate so much. I sincerely hope we don't appear disrespectful in this or any other regard. I’ll try to just briefly reply to any questions you raised here: -- Bhante Vimalaramsi wrote: > > Dhamma Greetings Sarah, > > So your stance is that it is unwholesome to pull up wholesome thoughts > because that desire is unwholesome? What is the sense of that? Where is > right effort as described in the suttas in this. If you will remember I > took a long time explaining what the Satipatthana Sutta said about the > hindrances and to be honest in practical terms that is the way it works. …. S: I read the Satipatthana Sutta --and all suttas for that matter—- as being concerned with the development of understanding and awareness of dhammas (realities) as anatta. If there’s a ‘trying to do’ or ‘trying to pull up’, it can so easily reflect an idea of a someone to do this and a wish to do so, rather than awareness of the very dhamma appearing as we speak. Right effort always accompanies right understanding regardless. Like chanda, viriya (effort) is a pakinnaka (particular) cetasika which also accompanies akusala (unwholesome) cittas. Just because we are concerned about practice, the eightfold path and nibbana, most certainly doesn’t mean the effort is ‘right’ at such times. …. > The ideas you present seem to have a very pessimistic tone to them. Is > this what the Buddha actually taught? …. S: Of course any ideas of mine have no value whatsoever unless they are in conformity with the Buddha’s teachings. I would say these teachings are not pessimistic or optimistic, but rather realistic. He described all dhammas just as they are. …. >> The idea that the only way to see anything is by having wisdom arise by > itself. But this isn't necessarily so, it does take effort and strong > mindfulness. What you are describing is a let it be attitude and hope > that wisdom takes over, just seems to go far away from the Buddha's > teachings (in reality). …. SN1:10 Forest (Bodhi transl) [The Blessed One] “They do not sorrow over the past, Nor do they hanker over the future, They maintain themselves with what is present: Hence their complexion is so serene. “Through hankering for the future, Through sorrowing over the past, Fools dry up and wither away Like a green reed cut down.” S: Of course I’m not suggesting that I have a serene complexion, but I do find the reminders about detachment and any direct understanding of dhammas to be very sobering indeed in this regard. “For the past has been left behind And the future has not been reached. Instead with insight let him see Each presently arisen state” (MN131 .. S: It doesn’t mean that we can’t smile or show good humour as you advocate. On the contrary, I think that with the development of awareness, there will be less worry, anxiety about the self, past, future and so on and more naturally arising smiles. (Actually, as Ken O knows, I’m a bit of a smiling advocate myself;-). …. > Your whole idea about chanda is not correct according to my teacher > Sayadaw U Silananda who by the way is a bhikkhu of 60 years standing in > the sangha and is a famous abhidhamma scholar. So I'll take his > definitions, if you don't mind. I lived with him as his attendant for 2 > years, and was told over and over that chanda is a wholesome desire, > period. The saying that chanda can be unwholesome isn't correct > according > to him. …. S: I have great respect for Sayadaw u Silananda and I’m sure you are blessed to have spent so much time with him. Perhaps what he meant was that ‘wholesome desire is chanda’? Certainly this particular kind of chanda is necessary for dana, sila and bhavana of any kind and it is a ‘forerunner’ for the arising of the eightfold path.Indeed it is one of the four adhipatis (predominant factors) along with viriya (energy), citta and vimamsa or panna (investigation). Having said that, I like to refer to U Silananda’s helpful charts from time to time which I have with some of his notes in a booklet which RobM kindly gave us. They are also included in B.Bodhi’s CMA* which so many of us refer to here. In these charts, we clearly see that chanda is one of those cetasikas which arises with cittas of different jatis – i.e it can be kusala, akusala, vipaka or kiriya. Htoo wrote a post on these details recently: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/38512 It may be a little technical for some tastes, but let me quote from his post here and add a few comments: H:Among 6 pakinnaka cetasikas, we left one more cetasika in this group of flexible ministers of the king citta. It is chanda cetasika. When we were discussing on cetasika, we have talked on chanda in comparison with lobha cetasika. Now to have a more clearer view, let us have a look at chanda cetasika and where it can arise. …. S: Pakinnaka cetasikas refer to the mental factors which can arise with akusala (unwholesome) as well as sobhana (beautiful)cittas and cetasikas. B.Bodhi refers to these mental factors like chanda as ‘ethically variable’. He writes in CMA: “The characteristic of chanda is desire to act, its function is searching for an object, its manifestation is need for an object, and that same object is its proximate cause. It should be regarded as the stretching forth of the mind’s hand towards the object.” So chanda arises with lobha, with dosa too, as well as with dana, sila and bhavana. …. H:Chanda cetasika or wish or will is not a universal cetasika. So it does not arise with each and every citta. There are 89 cittas in total. There are 2 moha mula cittas called vicikiccha citta and uddhacca citta. Chanda cetasika does not arise in both of these two moha mula cittas. There is no way to arise 'wish' to spread out mind wandering here and there. By the same token, when in doubt there is no chanda or wish at all. …. S: So apart from cittas rooted in ignorance and accompanied by doubt and restlessness, it arises with all other unwholesome cittas. What is the use of all these details, charts and endless classifications which Htoo gives so willingly? The value is only in seeing more clearly how all these different dhammas are conditioned and anatta. It is so easy for us ignorant worldlings to take viriya or chanda for 'me' that has to make an effort, show zeal and that whilst doing so, it's good or pure or to be encouraged. In reality, there are many passing dhammas - kusala, akusala, vipaka and then all the rupas as well. 'Mere elements....' …. > There seems to be a lot of worry and fear involved on this group about > with whether something is brought up or not ….. S: You’d have to give me an example. I seem to have missed all that ‘worry and fear’. … >and the use of the word > pan~n~a seems to the catch-all phrase that still changes depending on > the > situation. Too much theory without direct practice is the cause of this. …. S: Can we measure ‘direct practice’ so easily. When Sayadaw U Silananda painstakingly writes his charts, can there be no ‘direct practice’? How did the Buddha define ‘direct practice’? …. > I've never run across so many people who think that it will take > countless lifetimes to experience the Dhamma that the Buddha teaches. > This shows the sad state of the Buddha Dhamma these days. …. S: Certainly I’ve never said or suggested this. I checked with Jon when we read your message and he said he hadn’t either.It doesn’t ring a bell here. There’s a BIG difference between saying that the Buddha, his disciples or we must have been wandering in samsara for countless lifetimes or that it’s taken countless lifetimes for any wisdom to develop and in saying it will take countless more lifetimes. Who knows? We have no idea and I never think or speculate about it. Conditions are quite unknown and any expectations either way are quite useless as I see it. ….. >It is > time to go back to the basics as taught in the suttas and vinaya and > actually practice in the way that the Buddha prescribed, rather than get > caught in intellectual webs of theorizing. As the Buddha told Venerable > Ananda in sutta #106, section 15: "What should be done for his disciples > out of compassion by a teacher who seeks their welfare and has > compassion > for them, that I have done for you, Ananda. There are these roots of > trees, these empty huts. Meditate, Ananda, do not delay, or else you > will > regret it later. This is our instruction to you." …. S: And how do you understand the word ‘meditate’ here, Bhante? Should we also look to the Dhamma as our refuge, as the island as advocated in his final words? Thank you again for your reflections. Metta, Sarah *CMA is B.Bodhi’s translation of the text (also with Pali) with notes adapted from the commentary to the Abhidammattha Sangaha. You mentioned you don’t have access to many texts where you are. May Jon and I offer to purchase you a copy from Pariyatti and have it sent to you directly? If so, pls let us have your details for mailing off-list.You may like to have this easy reference to U Silananda’s charts. ============================================================ 39554 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 1:32am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 68- Perception/Sa~n~naa (o) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.3 Perception(sa~n~naa)contd] ***** Saññå does not only arise with kåmåvacara cittas ( cittas of the sensesphere),it arises also with cittas of other planes of consciousness. When one develops samatha saññå recognizes and ‘marks’ the meditation subject of samatha. When calm is more developed, one may acquire a ‘mental image’ (nimitta) (1) of the meditation subject. The saññå which remembers a ‘mental image’ of a meditation subject is different from the saññå which arises all the time in daily life and perceives sense-objects. When one attains jhåna, saññå accompanies the jhånacitta and then saññå is not of the sensuous plane of consciousness. When saññå accompanies rúpåvacara citta (rúpa-jhånacitta) saññå is also rúpåvacara and when saññå accompanies arúpåvacara citta (arúpa-jhånacitta) saññå is also arúpåvacara. The saññå which is arúpåvacara is more refined than the saññå which is rúpåvacara. The fourth stage of arúpa-jhåna is the ‘Sphere of neither perception nor non-perception’ (n’eva-saññå-n’åsaññåyatana)(2). The saññå which accompanies the arúpåvacara citta of the fourth stage of jhåna is extremely subtle. We read in the Visuddhimagga(X, 50): -'…the perception here is neither perception, since it is incapable of -performing the decisive function of perception, nor yet non-perception, -since it is present in a subtle state as a residual formation, thus it is ‘neither perception nor non-perception…’(3) *** 1) Abhidhamma in Daily Life Chapter 21. 2) Abhidhamma in Daily Life Chapter 22 3) Abhidhamma in Daily Life Chapter 22 ***** [Ch.3 Perception(sa~n~naa)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 39555 From: antony272b2 Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 1:43am Subject: [dsg] Guarding the sense doors (was: Re: kusala and akusala) Hi Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "plnao" wrote: > I'm very interested in deepening my understanding of guarding the sense > doors. So am I! Thanks for your response! > I think of > the monk who "stops at seeing" , the one who saw the beautiful > woman as "teeth walking by" instead of proliferating about her. The monk > didn't avert his eyes in that case. He > saw the woman. But it stopped there. Mental proliferation didn't take over. > He didn't see a woman! He only saw teeth! He said afterwards that he didn't know if it was a man or a woman. > > Very interesting and important topic, for sure. Look forward to discussing > it more with you. Me too. > > Metta, > Phil May you be well and happy, Antony. 39556 From: sarahprocterabbott Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 1:53am Subject: Re: objects of satipatthana Hi Larry, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Rob, > > In Soma Thera's "Way of Mindfulness" see pages 32 and 33, commentary on > "kaayaanupassi". This will be in dsg archives under "way 21" and "way > 22", I think. However, escribe is off-line right now. If you can locate > the time frame these were posted Nina had some comments as well. .... S: Forget escribe -they lost all our archives in a computer blow-out I think. I just went to www.dhammastudygroup.org In the first search space (atomz- the better I've found), I keyed in 'soma, way 21, contemplating' and was shown the 1600s as the first item. With the usual ctrl + F, I keyed in 'contemplating' (a more unusual word in the passage would have been better) and it took me to message 16710, your first Way 21 extract. If you continue with 'next', 'next', it'll take you to Nina's, Kom's and others, but I have to dash out now, o'wise I'd give more post nos.. RobM has found it easier to download all these archive files onto his hard disk and use with google desk search, but I don't get the good results he does that way. Hope you can find the relevant passages to quote. Here's one I like: "There can be nothing apart from the qualities of primary and derived materiality, in a body" i.e just rupas! Metta, Sarah p.s enjoyed your posts of late - good to see you picking up different threads. =================== 39557 From: antony272b2 Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 2:05am Subject: [dsg] Guarding the sense doors (was: Re: kusala and akusala) Hi Phil, I wasn't quite correct. For the story go to the following link and search for "teeth": http://www.aimwell.org/Books/Library/Mahasi/Dependent/Feeling/feeling. html > > I think of > > the monk who "stops at seeing" , the one who saw the beautiful > > woman as "teeth walking by" instead of proliferating about her. The > monk > > didn't avert his eyes in that case. He > > saw the woman. But it stopped there. Mental proliferation didn't > take over. > > > > He didn't see a woman! He only saw teeth! He said afterwards that he > didn't know if it was a man or a woman. > May you be well and happy, Antony. 39558 From: Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 10:08pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Guarding the sense doors (was: Re: kusala and akusala) Hi, Antony - In a message dated 12/7/04 11:29:42 PM Eastern Standard Time, antony272b@h... writes: > Dear Howard, > > Please allow me to enter this thread. > > I disagree. I think that voluntary censorship of the sense doors is very > important to maintaining one’s equanimity especially I think this would be > with practising the samatha jhanas. Vipassana may be another matter. My > Satipatthana Vipassana teacher once said that lust would still come up again > > after practising guarding the sense doors which he said was “another > practiceâ€?. > > I found this sutta quote which seems to apply to guarding the sense doors: > (the terms in brackets are from Bhikkhus’ Bodhi and Nanamoli translation) > > “It was said, “Sariputta, forms cognizable by eye consciousness are also > twofold those that should be followed (cultivated) and not followedâ€? On > account of what was it said by the Blessed One? Venerable sir, when > following certain forms cognizable by eye consciousness, demerit > (unwholesome states) increases and merit (wholesome states) decreases, such > forms should not be followed when following certain forms cognizable by eye > consciousness, demerit decreases and merit increases, such forms should be > followed. It was said, “Sariputta, forms cognizable by eye consciousness too > > are twofold, those that should be followed and not followed.â€? It was said on > > account of this.â€? > (similarly for the other senses) > http://www.mahindarama.com/e-tipitaka/Majjhima%20Nikaya/mn-114.htm > --------------------------------------------- Howard: Antony, I'm not so sure we are in disagreement on this. The question is what it means "to follow" and "to not follow". These are reactive matters. A form cognizable by eye consciousness first arises. This is not something we created. It just arises. If it is enticing to us, there is a tendency to apply one's attention in that direction and look for more. But by "guarding the eyesense" such following, such prusuit will not be engaged in, and we will turn our attention elsewhere. It is a matter of follow-up, of reaction. We cut off craving that has not yet arisen by attending and not pusuing. We abandon craving already arisen by turning away, thereby not providing further nutriment. And so on. The "battle" however, is not to be waged minly in the style of the three monkeys with hands over ears, eyes, and mouths. What arises, arises. What happens mentally in reaction is what critical. Of course, if we are at a place where only enticing events occur, and if our determination is kusala, we will take ourselves elsewhere. If we know about such a place, we will avoid it to begin with. I certainly don't claim otherwise. The adage "Out of sight, out of mind" does have some truth to it, though not complete truth. --------------------------------------------- > > In Majjhima 91 it says: “(Buddha) does not walk looking aboutâ€? > -------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes. Now what does that mean? Does that mean the Buddha walks with eyes shut? Or that he pays no attention to visual input? Or that by his developed powers he controls the flow of world events? I think not. It means that he is *very* attentive, at each moment, to what arises (visually in this example), in order to avoid reactiveness and to take useful action. Most particularly, to not walk looking about means to not be seeking what is titilating, exciting, or enticing, to be finely attentive to the arising of any such input, to avoid akusala mental reaction, and to avoid pursuit of further input of that sort by appropriate action. ------------------------------------------ > In “In This Very Lifeâ€? by Sayadaw U Pandita (which is almost all available > > online) p215: > > “The ex-bhikkhu (new deva) was afraid even to set foot inside the gate of > his mansion. He knew his strength of mind would not last against these > pleasures, far more intense than those of our human world.â€? > > Mahasi Sayadaw taught: > > (1) Where visible objects remain unseen, there //kilesa// ceases > by itself. > > (2) Where visible objects are seen there //kilesa// lies in wait. > ---------------------------------------- Howard: But this should not be misinterpreted. One extreme reading would suggest that one should then poke out one's eyes! The remedy lies with mental excision, not physical. I am reminded of a film I own on tape entitled Circle of Iron. It is a martial arts parable for the spiritual quest, starring David Carradine. (Well worth seeing if one can find a copy.) At one point in the story, "the seeker" comes across a man in the desert who spends all his time standing waste deep in a large barrel of heated oil. He does this in an effort to destroy his sex organs, in order to free himself of that area of desire. Be assured that the implication was that his efforts were poorly directed! ;-)) --------------------------------------------- > > And he quoted the Buddha: > > "How do you answer this, Malukyaputta? Answer me as best you can. > There are certain tangible objects which you have never touched > previously, either in the immediate or remote past, or at the > present moment. Neither can you hope to touch them in the future. > Can such objects arouse desire, lust and affection in you?" > > Malukyaputta replied this in the negative. This is as it should > be. Here it may again be emphasised that no //kilesa// can arise > for sense-objects with which one is not familiar.â€? > http://www.buddhanet.net/filelib/medbud/mahasimk.zip > ===== > I no longer believe that Satipatthana Vipassana is “choiceless awarenessâ€?. > I like Ajahn Brahmavamso’s humorous use of the simile for mindfulness of a > person who's guarding a door or guarding a gate. > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eightfold-l/message/3013 > > I am motivated to research this topic if people are interested. > Maybe one day I’ll get an entry in the “Useful Postsâ€? > > May you be well and happy, > > Antony. > > ======================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39559 From: Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 10:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi, James - In a message dated 12/7/04 11:42:38 PM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > If that is what the Buddha meant that is what he would have said. > He said guarding the senses, plural. Guarding means deciding what > will enter and what won't. I am not convinced by your argument. > ====================== Okay. Please see my reply to Antony's post. My position is not the diametrical opposite of yours, though it is not exactly the same either. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39560 From: Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 10:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Guarding the sense doors (was: Re: kusala and akusala) Hi, Phil - The position you express in the following is exactly mine. You express it well and exemplify it by a very well chosen quote. In a message dated 12/8/04 12:12:03 AM Eastern Standard Time, plnao@j... writes: > I believe I have benefited in some areas from experimenting with a strict > "one plough's length" approach to the sense > doors. I could babble at length about how, but I'll spare you for now. > > On the other hand, the other day I found this sutta passage, and came to > a similar conclusion to Howard, > that "guarding the sense doors" does not always mean averting the eyes, for > example, but can have to do more with what > follows through the mind. > -------------------------------------- Howard: I agree. Of course, sometimes it also does involve averting the eyes. It all depends on the state of one's mind as to how one needs to respond. When the mind is extremely vulnerable, the eyes need to turn away. The battle is still a mental one, however, for the eyes don't avert on their own - the mind does the directing. --------------------------------------- > > Here is that passage from, AN IV 37: > > "And how does a monk guard the doors to his sense faculties? There is > the case where a monk, on seeing a form > with the eye, does not grasp at any theme or variations by which- if he were > to dwell without restraint over the > faculty of the eye -- evil, unskillful qualities such as greed or distress > might assail him. He practices with restrain. He guards > the faculty of the eye. He achieves restrain with regard to the faculty of > the eye." (end quote) > > This "grasp at any theme or variations by which...evil unskillful > qualities...might assail him" would seem to indicate mental > processes that following the initial seeing, wouldn't you agree? I think of > the monk who "stops at seeing" , the one who saw the beautiful > woman as "teeth walking by" instead of proliferating about her. The monk > didn't avert his eyes in that case. He > saw the woman. But it stopped there. Mental proliferation didn't take over. > > So I would guess "guarding the sense doors" can refer both to literally > averting the eyes and to right attention that prevents > unwholesome proliferation based on what is seen. Again, I suspect that those > of us with very gross defilements can benefit > more from a "one plough's length" approach, but as insight deepens, we can > look, and see and come closer to stopping right there. > ------------------------------------- Howard: Well said! ------------------------------------ > > Very interesting and important topic, for sure. Look forward to discussing > it more with you. > > Metta, > Phil > ======================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39561 From: Date: Tue Dec 7, 2004 10:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Guarding the sense doors (was: Re: kusala and akusala) Hi, Antony (and Phil) - In a message dated 12/8/04 4:46:15 AM Eastern Standard Time, antony272b@h... writes: > > I think of > >the monk who "stops at seeing" , the one who saw the beautiful > >woman as "teeth walking by" instead of proliferating about her. The > monk > >didn't avert his eyes in that case. He > >saw the woman. But it stopped there. Mental proliferation didn't > take over. > > > > He didn't see a woman! He only saw teeth! He said afterwards that he > didn't know if it was a man or a woman. > > ======================= Exactly. Due to cultivating the mind and carefully monitoring its functioning in the processing of input, including eye-door input, certain conceptual processing was avoided. He did *see* a woman, but he didn't "see" a woman - he didn't cognize one. The work was mental, not visual. (Of course, a monk further along in practice, wouldn't even need to engage in that sort of mental censorship, but could "see" a woman without craving resulting.) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39562 From: plnao Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 3:40am Subject: Re: [dsg] Guarding the sense doors (was: Re: kusala and akusala) Hi Antony, and Howard and James, and all... That link didn't work, unfortunately, Antony. Antony > He didn't see a woman! He only saw teeth! He said afterwards that he > didn't know if it was a man or a woman. But then you say this wasn't quite right? Could you clarify please? I think someone asked him if he had seen a woman in bangles and whatnot walk by, and he said he saw a set of teeth. I think since we are not monks we should fully expect to see the whole person, and - in my case- proliferate at times, either on how lovely or unlovely the person is, especially the former. I have deeply dug tracks in my mind that my thoughts fall into easily, as we all do. Wise attention will guide the thoughts into fresher, kusala tracks? The habitual tracks will ever so gradually lose their power to pull thoughts along? Of course, it's not about tracks, it's about natural decisive support condition, accumulations. I should stop thinking about tracks. I don't want to avert my eyes. I do so now, when passing a woman in the street, but that's courtesy because as a causcasian in Japan I've come to know how it feels to be glanced at in an overly curious way -it doesn't feel good. So I've stopped glancing at other people, out of courtesy. On another occasion, about a year and a half ago, I remember sitting at a window seat at Starbucks on a warm sunny day. The lasses were out in their spring skirts and Phil was feeling frisky. I made a very deliberate effort to *not* glance up from my books as the gals walked by (so if I didn't glance up how did I know they were walking by?) and it was *very* difficult. Unbelievably difficult. So many years of habitual behaviour to be deprogrammed. Now there's not much problem, but we'll see how it is next spring. Last week I had an interesting experience. I was walking towards the station, and as I thought (proliferated) about plans to show a visiting friend around Tokyo, I realized that I was looking at a woman. My mind was busy on something else, but the woman was already in a kind of cognition next-in-line place. Difficult to explain. My eye had locked on her, but my mind was busy on other things. It was an interesting moment. I thought how the seeing the woman, just seeing her, was not harmful, and wouldn't be until my mind started proliferating. So this would be a kind of confirmation - for me at least- that it is at the mind door that the more important guarding takes place or doesn't take place, presumably in a way that is beyond a worldling's will power. But I'm just beginning to think about this. Metta, Phil 39563 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 3:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 157 ), pure citta Dear Nina, Thanks for your kind words. With Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Htoo, > op 07-12-2004 10:42 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > > > In this dhamma molecule, one atom is 'citta' which is pure, luminous, > > sinless. > N: I appreciate this reminder more and more. Also Rob M differentiated citta > and citta with cetasikas. At first I did not understand it so well, but I > recently listened to a discussion in India. A. Sujin said that citta is just > the faculty of knowing (manindriya), that it is pure, pandara. We can > understand this in considering seeing that cognizes visible object. There > are not yet akusala cetasikas or sobhana cetasikas. The latter cause citta > to be akusala citta or kusala citta at the moments of javana. We were > talking about it whether we can realize now lobha and she said: there is all > the time the idea of my lobha. This shows that it is difficult to directly > know akusala cetasikas and sobhana cetasikas, but understanding can begin. > But first I think it important to know more clearly the faculty of knowing > and rupa which does not know anything. > I find citta which is pure such a good reminder now. > Nina. 39564 From: plnao Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 4:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] I tried it and liked it! (was Re: Bhante and Smiling ) Hello again Bhante Vimalaramsi Phil > To use a very crude example, think of turning the stove up every time you > feel cold, and thereby feeling comfortable - and then what would the result > be if you ran out of heating oil for the stove? The suffering from the cold > would be much worse than if you had sat patiently with it. So for a moment, > yes, no more suffering, but in the long run more suffering when we seek > comfort moment by moment. Perhaps? I'd like to be able to say that the "you" here is the impersonal 3rd person ( i.e "one") but on re-reading it doesn't look that way. Am I really impudent enough to tell a venerable monk about how he would feel with respect to cold!?! I'm sorry if the tone of the whole post sounded disrespectful, Bhante. You've been very patient with me. Metta, Phil 39565 From: Ken O Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 5:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi RobM Hmm I thought all along I was talking in terms of the ultimate realty. We have finished the existence part :) so now the other aspect of ultimate reality Extract this from zolag.co.uk, under Survey of Paramattha Dhammas <> Concept exist only as a mental construct or as a abstract but concept of being can be change according to planes. But aggregates are the same regardless which plane you are in. Give you another sutta quote DN Sutta 9, Potthapada Sutta <<39. Potthapada, there are three kinds of "acquired self" (220): the gross self acquired self, the mind-made acquired self, the formless acquired self. What is gross acquired self? It has form, is composed of the four great elements. nourished by material food. What is mind-made self? It has form, complete with all its parts, not defective in any sense organ. What is the formless acquire self? It is without form, and made up of perception?>> (220) - Atta-patilaabha. This is of course oly an 'assumed' or 'presumed' self: 'the fleeting union of qualities that make up, for a time only, an unstable individuality (RD). The word is glossed by DA as attabhaava-patilaabha 'adoption (or assumption) of selfhood'. The three kinds of 'acquired self' correspond to the three realms of Sense Disire, of Form and of No-Form. Cf. DN 33.1.11 (38) and AN 4.172 Wordlings does not directly known as in Mualpariyaya Sutta is to me, means he does not see there is no self in the D.O. He attaches to world, self (which are all concepts) but attachment is reality. What I mean by directly known, means can be experience, for eg unpleasant can be directly experience, craving can be experience, can chair or table be experience. By the way, are you saying that D.O is not about realities and are you saying aggregates is not about realities? Ken O 39566 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 6:02am Subject: Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... Hi Howard, Whilst Nina and Connie discuss the Eightfold Path factors under this heading with you, I'll briefly look at conditions here. --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Something additional has occurred to me. Among the things that I > pointed out as realities that are not paramattha dhammas are anatta, > paticcasamupada, and general conditionality and all the relations set > forth in the > Patthana. .... Anatta is a characteristic of all paramattha dhammas. D.O. and the Patthana are concerned with paramattha dhammas. As we're talking about the Patthana, the great Abhidhamma text, I think it's fair the give the abhidhamma perspective here;-): Quote from U Narada's introduction to the Patthana translation (PTS): "Just as the hotness of chilli is inherent in it and cannot exist apart from it and as the sweetness of sugar is inherent in it and cannot exist apart from it, so also, the conditioning forces inherent in the (conditioning) states cannot exist apart from those states. For example, in root condition, the force of greed, which is one of the six roots, cannot exist apart from that state. Here the root conditioning state is greed and the conditioning force of greed is also greed. Therefore, the force and the state which possesses that force cannot be considered apart from each other." ..... The conditioned dhammas are all paramattha dhammas. ... >Other less noble existents whose ontological status is weaker > are those > "things" knowable only by conceptualization, such as trees, tables, > chariots, and > persons. > Note that *all* the foregoing are conditioned mind-door objects. .... S: ....not conditioned. .... > And > none of them is a member of any khandha. This suggests to me that the > breakdown > of the content of experience into sense door & sense object pairs (or > sense > door & sense object & sense consciousness triples) is more far-reaching > than > the five-khandha breakdown. Included among the mind-door objects are all > the > realities that I have pointed out as not belonging to any of the five > khandhas, > and nibbana as well, the one non-khandhic paramattha dhamma. .... S: Concepts are mind door objects (dhammaaramma.na) but they are not khandhas. All realities or paramattha dhammas, apart from nibbana, are included in the khandhas. Nothing else exists. .... >Along these > lines, > note how the Buddha defined "the all" in the Sabba Sutta. He did *not* > use > the khandha breakdown there. .... S: He uses the ayatana breakdown. This is another way of classifying the same realities, though dhamma ayatana includes nibbana. .... >There the Buddha defines "the all" as > follows: > "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & > aromas, > tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, ... S: all included in rupa khandha too ... > *the mind & mental > phenomena. ... S: all included in the 5 khandhas apart from nibbana. Mental phenomena here refers to dhammaayatana which comprises subtle rupas, cetasikas and nibbana. (Note as we've discussed before in detail, that mental phenomena here do not include concepts - there may be a mistake in one of BB's notes to 'The All' in Salayatanasamyutta as I recall in this regard). More on Sabba Sutta in U.P. ... > This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this > All, I > will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the > grounds for > his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put > to > grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." .... S: Exactly - just the ayatanas or khandhas + nibbana included in this All. Metta, Sarah ===== 39567 From: jwromeijn Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 6:08am Subject: Re: Letter to B.Bodhi-'The Jhânas and the Lay Disciple ..' --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Warning: Technical and Pali-filled - you may wish to ignore this one! > ==================================== > > Dear Friends, > > As most people will recall, some time ago I posted an article by Bhikkhu > Bodhi: > "The Jhânas and the Lay Disciple According to the Pâli Suttas" Dear Sarah,(and all) I like this thread Sarah, because it touches one of the themes that occupy me: is doing insight-meditation enough or had I also to reach jhana concentration ? (Enough for what ? For getting enlightened; the term I prefer) Two questions: In the article of Bhikkhu Bodhi the 'right concentration' as one of the parts of the eightfold path is mentioned many times. The 'right mindfulness' (samma sati) not at all. And it is this 'right mindfulness' that plays a central role in the so called insight meditation (also called in Europe 'vipassana'), based on the Satapathana Sutta I don't understand why 'right mindfulness' is not mentioned; to me 'right concentration' is not more important (for getting enlightenend) than 'right mindfulness'? The second question: the article of BB is about lay-people. But we are talking about fundamental things; and social-spiritual roles like being a monk, a nun or a layman/laywoman doesn't play a role at that level ? Metta Joop PS the Pali-terms were no problem: I skip them when I don't recognize them, thinking: "Pali-words are just words, and words are symbols, and symbols are concepts." 39568 From: Ken O Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 6:22am Subject: Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Concept ...) Hi Howard I think paramattha dhammas is always a problematic classification of dhammas :). Actually to me, it only mean to define two things, they are realities and these realities have the same characterisitcs no matter which planes we live in or how we live in. But conventional reality changes according to the planes we live in. According to the Abhidhamma stucture, the four great elements and its derived elements are in form aggregate the sanna cetasikas as in sanna aggregate the vedana cetasikas as in vedana aggregate the rest of the cetasikas are in the sankhara aggregate. (where the three unwholesome roots and three wholesome roots etc are classify) the citta as in the citta aggregated and only Nibbana is not in the aggregates You are right to say there is conventional reality, and they are different from aggregates, they are ultimate reality. These convention realities are mental constructs, only exists in imagination. 8NP are paramatha dhammas, I think connie has explained it. With regards to Right Thinking, it is application of the mind (a cetasika). The application arise with alobha and adosa. D.O are all in the aggregates, for example, feeling in the feeling aggregate, cravings and ignorance in the sankhara aggregates, formations are in the sankhara aggregatas as kamma etc. Ken O 39569 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 9:48am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 160 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, We have discussed dhammas at atomic level. That is discussion on individual dhamma. Dhammas are citta, cetasika, rupa, nibbana. Pannatti has also been discussed at atomic level. Now we are currently discussing dhammas at molecular level. With a few exceptions, there are hardly any atoms that exist as atoms. Example element is 'hydrogen'. This element is 'the lightest of all elements that ever exist'. Subatomic level is no more elementary. Hydrogen does not exist in atomic form. It exists as molecules. 2 atoms of hydrogen element combine and make a molecule of hydrogen. Elementary dhammas are citta, cetasika, rupa, and nibbana. Citta never exists on its own as a separate element. But citta arises with other elements called cetasikas. When 2 atoms of hydrogen combine with 1 atom of oxygen, this combination makes a molecule of water. When several atoms of cetasikas combine with 1 atom of citta, that combination makes a molecule of so called 'named citta'. There are 121 total 'named cittas'. We are discussing at molecular level of these 121 'named cittas'. So far 40 lokuttara cittas or 40 supramundane consciousness, 27 mahaggata cittas or 27 jhana cittas, 24 kama sobhana cittas or 24 sensuous beautiful consciousness altogether 40 + 27 + 24 = 91 sobhana cittas or 91 beautiful consciousness have been discussed. After discussion at molecular level of these cittas, 12 akusala cittas or unwholesome consciousness, and 3 ahetuka kiriya cittas or 3 rootless functional consciousness were discussed. These 12 + 3 = 15 cittas are asobhana cittas or non-beautiful consciousness. There are further 15 asobhana cittas or 15 non-beautiful consciousness. In the previous post, they have been listed. 7 pairs of cittas and 1 somanassa citta altogehter 15 vipaka cittas or 15 resultant consciousness. 5 pairs are called panca-vinnana cittas or 5-sense- consciousness. 2 pairs are sampaticchana cittas or receiving consciousness and santirana cittas or investigating consciousness. Each part of the pairs are resulted from akusala or kusala. Unpaired consciousness here is 'somanassa saha gatam ahetuka vipaka santirana citta'. Somanassa means 'mental joy'. Saha means 'with'. Gata means 'to go'. Saha gata means 'to go with'. So this citta arises with mental joy. Ahetuka means 'rootless'. Root here are dhamma which are 'alobha' 'adosa' 'amoha', 'lobha' 'dosa' 'moha' because they support other dhamma like roots of a tree, without which the tree will die out. Vipaka means 'resultant'. Santirana means 'investigating'. This dhamma molecule is made up of 1 atom of pure citta, and 11 atoms of cetasikas. These 11 cetasikas are 7 universal cetasikas ( phassa, vedana, cetana, sanna, ekaggata, jivitindriya, manasikara), and 4 of 6 pakinnaka cetasikas. These 4 are vitakka, vicara, adhimokkha, and piti cetasikas. Chanda does not arise in any of 18 ahetuka cittas. Viriya does not arise in this citta as it is not needed. This citta can arise after sampaticchana and just before votthappana citta or determining consciousness. Determining consciousness does need viriya. But santirana cittas whether with joy or with upekkha feeling do not need any viriya or effort in their arising. So chanda and viriya do not arise in 'somanassa santirana citta'. In this citta, there is no akusala cetasikas and no sobhana cetasika. This citta can do the job of investigating(santirana) and the job of retention (tadarammana ). It cannot do the job of patisandhi, bhavanga, and cuti, while 'upekkha santirana citta' can perform these 3 jobs along with investigation and retention altogether 5 functions. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39570 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 10:05am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 161 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 7 pairs of cittas left to discuss at molecular level. 2 pairs are 2 sampaticchana cittas and 2 santirana cittas. 1. upekkha saha gatam ahetuka akusala vipaka sampaticchana citta 2. upekkha saha gatam ahetuka kusala vipaka sampaticchana citta 3. upekkha saha gatam ahetuka akusala vipaka santirana citta 4. upekkha saha gatam ahetuka kusala vipaka santirana citta In all these 4 cittas, each citta is accompanied by 10 cetasikas only. They are 7 universal cetasikas, vitakka, vicara, and adhimokkha cetasikas. They do not need viriya, chanda, and piti. There is no cetasika of 14 akusala cetasikas and no cetasika of 25 sobhana cetasikas. So these 4 dhamma molecules are made up of 1 atom of pure citta and 10 atoms of cetasikas. Each dhamma in them just last a moment. There is no permanent dhamma. And there is no storehouse for these dhamma. We left 10 cittas. They are called pancavinnana cittas. They are 10 consciousness of 5-sense-consciousness. A) Akusala pancavinnana cittas 1. upekkha saha gatam ahetuka akusala vipaka cakkhuvinnana citta 2. upekkha saha gatam ahetuka akusala vipaka sotavinnana citta 3. upekkha saha gatam ahetuka akusala vipaka ghanavinnana citta 4. upekkha saha gatam ahetuka akusala vipaka jivhavinnana citta 5. dukkha saha gatam ahetuka akusala vipaka kayavinnana citta B) Kusala pancavinnana cittas 1. upekkha saha gatam ahetuka kusala vipaka cakkhuvinnana citta 2. upekkha saha gatam ahetuka kusala vipaka sotavinnana citta 3. upekkha saha gatam ahetuka kusala vipaka ghanavinnana citta 4. upekkha saha gatam ahetuka kusala vipaka jivhavinnana citta 5. sukha saha gatam ahetuka kusala vipaka kayavinnana citta All these 10 vinnana cittas are accompanied by only 7 cetasikas. They are 7 universal mental factors of phassa, vedana, cetana, sanna, ekaggata, jivitindriya, and manasikara. No other cetasikas arise in these 10 vinnana cittas. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39571 From: Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 5:18am Subject: Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 12/8/04 9:05:10 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@y... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > Whilst Nina and Connie discuss the Eightfold Path factors under this > heading with you, I'll briefly look at conditions here. > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > Something additional has occurred to me. Among the things that I > >pointed out as realities that are not paramattha dhammas are anatta, > >paticcasamupada, and general conditionality and all the relations set > >forth in the > >Patthana. > .... > Anatta is a characteristic of all paramattha dhammas. --------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, it is. And it is a reality, is it not? But it is not, itself, a paramattha dhamma, is it? That is all I'm saying. It is a reality known through the mind door by wisdom, and it is *not* a paramattha dhamma. ------------------------------------- D.O. and the> > Patthana are concerned with paramattha dhammas. As we're talking about the > Patthana, the great Abhidhamma text, I think it's fair the give the > abhidhamma perspective here;-): > > Quote from U Narada's introduction to the Patthana translation (PTS): > > "Just as the hotness of chilli is inherent in it and cannot exist apart > from it and as the sweetness of sugar is inherent in it and cannot exist > apart from it, so also, the conditioning forces inherent in the > (conditioning) states cannot exist apart from those states. > > For example, in root condition, the force of greed, which is one of the > six roots, cannot exist apart from that state. > ---------------------------------- Howard: Certainly relations do not hold independently of what are related by them. The relations are also not identical with what they relate. The relations are not imagined. They are, thus, "realities". But they also are not paramattha dhammas. There is no khandha that the relation of contiguity, for example, belongs to. That relation is neither rupa nor vedana nor sankhara nor sa~n~na nor vi~n~nana. It is not to be found among the entire group of cetasikas. And it is not nibbana. Thus it is a reality that is not a paramattha dhamma. --------------------------------- > > Here the root conditioning state is greed and the conditioning force of > greed is also greed. Therefore, the force and the state which possesses > that force cannot be considered apart from each other." > ..... > The conditioned dhammas are all paramattha dhammas. > -------------------------------------- Howard: The issue is relations, not the related dhammas. The relations are neither rupas, citta, cetasikas, nor nibbana. They are, however, conditioned realities. They occur in dependence on what they relate, and they occur for cause, in dependence on conditions, not randomly, and not eternally. More problematical is the status of something like anatta/impersonality. It is either reality or concept, correct? If concept, then, as some here view concept, it is nothing at all. If reality, then where does it fit in? It does not occur on any list of cetasikas, it is not a rupa, it is not a citta, and it is not nibbana. That exhausts the Abhidhammic categories, does it not? Something's wrong here! ;-)) -------------------------------------- > ... > >Other less noble existents whose ontological status is weaker > >are those > >"things" knowable only by conceptualization, such as trees, tables, > >chariots, and > >persons. > > Note that *all* the foregoing are conditioned mind-door objects. > .... > S: ....not conditioned. > ------------------------------------- Howard: You wish to exclude the conventional dhammas, which, by the way, the Buddha in the suttas, often included when using the term 'dhamma', because you do not accord them *any* degree of reality. But that, in my opinion, is an extreme. There is a perfectly reasonable sense in which it true to say there *is* rebirth in various realms, there *are* beings reborn, and there *are* trees, tables, chariots, and persons. On the other hand, they are not *ultimate realities*, and illusion sets in when we grasp them as self-existent entities that are "just as real" as sights, sounds, tastes, smells, hardness, warmth, etc. Their existence is dependent on many factors that go beyond that of the paramattha dhammas. In addition to the dependence (shared with paramattha dhammas) on conditions of various sorts, they also depend on the paramattha dhammas underlying them and that are their basis, on the relations among those paramattha dhammas, and on the conceptual processing that that carves them out from the experiential flux. But, for that matter, illusion also sets in when we grasp paramattha dhammas as separate, self-existent realities. They exist, but only as fleeting flashings, fully dependent on the confluence of other such empty, evanescent conditions. ---------------------------------------------- > .... > >And > >none of them is a member of any khandha. This suggests to me that the > >breakdown > >of the content of experience into sense door &sense object pairs (or > >sense > >door &sense object &sense consciousness triples) is more far-reaching > >than > >the five-khandha breakdown. Included among the mind-door objects are all > >the > >realities that I have pointed out as not belonging to any of the five > >khandhas, > >and nibbana as well, the one non-khandhic paramattha dhamma. > .... > S: Concepts are mind door objects (dhammaaramma.na) but they are not > khandhas. All realities or paramattha dhammas, apart from nibbana, are > included in the khandhas. Nothing else exists. -------------------------------------- Howard: Sarah, a repetition of a claim isn't proof of that claim. I gave specific examples of realities that are not paramattha dhammas that have not been addressed. (Not that anyone is obliged to do so.) Relations are realities, but they are not paramattha dhammas. Impersonality and impermanence are realities, and they are not paramattha dhammas. Thus, some of the most central and critical elements of the Dhamma are realities that are not paramattha dhammas. ------------------------------ > .... > >Along these > >lines, > >note how the Buddha defined "the all" in the Sabba Sutta. He did *not* > >use > >the khandha breakdown there. > .... > S: He uses the ayatana breakdown. This is another way of classifying the > same realities, though dhamma ayatana includes nibbana. > ------------------------------------ Howard: Yes, I know. That is my point exactly. The ayatana breakdown goes beyond the khandha breakdown. (Unless, of course one wants to categorize anatta, anicca, paticcasamupada, idappaccayata etc as merely concepts, and thus unreal.) ----------------------------------- ----------------------------------- > .... > >There the Buddha defines "the all" as > >follows: > > "What is the All? Simply the eye &forms, ear &sounds, nose & > >aromas, > >tongue &flavors, body &tactile sensations, > ... > S: all included in rupa khandha too > -------------------------------------- Howard: Yes. So far, so good. ------------------------------------ > ... > >*the mind &mental > >phenomena. > ... > S: all included in the 5 khandhas apart from nibbana. Mental phenomena > here refers to dhammaayatana which comprises subtle rupas, cetasikas and > nibbana. (Note as we've discussed before in detail, that mental phenomena > here do not include concepts - there may be a mistake in one of BB's notes > to 'The All' in Salayatanasamyutta as I recall in this regard). More on > Sabba Sutta in U.P. ------------------------------------- Howard: No, here is where the schemes differ. As you point out, nibbana is excluded from the khandhas, but it is an ayatana. But that is not all. Also excluded from all the khandhas are such mind-door realities as impersonality, impermanence, and many, many relations, including all relations of conditionality. ------------------------------------ > ... > >This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this > >All, I > >will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the > >grounds for > >his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put > >to > >grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." > .... > S: Exactly - just the ayatanas or khandhas + nibbana included in this All. -------------------------------------- Howard: Even when nibbana is added on, the ayatanas go beyond, precisely in the area of mind-door realities such as anatta, anicca, and conditionality. Of course, if one wants to say that these are not realities, and that they are concept-only, then, at least for folks who accord no reality or existence to so called pa~n~natti, that puts one in the difficult position of saying that the core elements of the Dhamma are actually nothing at all. But that even goes beyond what Nagarjuna was willing to do! ---------------------------------------- > > Metta, > > Sarah > ===================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39572 From: connieparker Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 10:44am Subject: Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities Dear Howard, > SPD: The factors of the eightfold Path are the following cetasikas:right > understanding (sammaa-di.t.thi, pa~n~naa cetasika), right thinking > (sammaa-sankappa, vitakka cetasika), right speech (sammaa-vaaca > cetasika),right action (sammaa-kammanta cetasika), right livelihood > (sammaa-aajiivacetasika), right effort (sammaa-vaayaama, viriya > cetasika), rightmindfulness (sammaa-sati, sati cetasika) and right > concentration(sammaa-samaadhi, ekaggataa cetasika). =========================== H: Thank you, Connie. Perhaps the path factors are - though I question that, as you will see below - but the path, itself, is certainly not. Nonetheless, the path is a reality - it is not imagined. The term 'reality' is not applied broadly enough - it should not be identified with the paramattha dhammas. C: Something like the way the self factors might be the khandas, but the self is not because the whole is more than the sum of it's parts as factors are multiplicands that get papancacated exponentially? A moment of the path can only be real when it happens. I haven't known it, so it is imagery to me. H: Now, a separate matter is that of whether the path factors really are all cetasikas. In several cases, one has to strain, squirm, and contort to see it that way. C: Being blind, I expect to have to go through all that to see anything Buddha pointed out - painting lessons in braille. No matter how many times I touch 'green' moss or envy or any other green piece experience, the dots just don't all connect for me. H: The path factors that I do not see as paramattha dhammas unless one takes them to mean something quite different from what they are called and different from how they are talked about in the suttas themselves, are the following: right thinking or intention or resolve (This is specifically defined by the Buddha as "Being resolved on renunciation, on freedom from ill-will, on harmlessness), and hence, it consists of several things, and so is not a paramattha dhamma), right speech (speech is a conventional phenomenon), right action (conventional - the Buddha defines it as follows: "Abstaining from taking life, abstaining from stealing, abstaining from unchastity," which makes this also consist of several phenomena, and thus not a paramattha dhamma), right livelihood (livelihood is a conventional phenomenon, and the Buddha specifies which livelihoods are wrong), and right effort (the Buddha defines this as consisting of several conventional activities - four to be exact, and it is thus not a paramattha dhamma). C: Uh... right intention? Cetana is not a path factor. Big Path is when or 'the way' all 8 of the factors, which must be cetasikas according to the definitions of the 4 basic dhammas, arise with/in the citta... a compound reality that would resolve into those component phenomena. It is a moment of resolution that would forever resolve our state of being and understanding. peace, connie 39573 From: Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 5:43am Subject: Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... Hi, Ken - Thank you for this reply. While it does not address all the "problems" I have in this area, your reply is very warmly made, helpful and most kind. I thank you very much! With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/8/04 9:28:53 AM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: > Hi Howard > > I think paramattha dhammas is always a problematic classification of > dhammas :). Actually to me, it only mean to define two things, they > are realities and these realities have the same characterisitcs no > matter which planes we live in or how we live in. But conventional > reality changes according to the planes we live in. > > According to the Abhidhamma stucture, > the four great elements and its derived elements are in form > aggregate > the sanna cetasikas as in sanna aggregate > the vedana cetasikas as in vedana aggregate > the rest of the cetasikas are in the sankhara aggregate. (where the > three unwholesome roots and three wholesome roots etc are classify) > the citta as in the citta aggregated > and only Nibbana is not in the aggregates > > You are right to say there is conventional reality, and they are > different from aggregates, they are ultimate reality. These > convention realities are mental constructs, only exists in > imagination. 8NP are paramatha dhammas, I think connie has explained > it. With regards to Right Thinking, it is application of the mind (a > cetasika). The application arise with alobha and adosa. > > D.O are all in the aggregates, for example, feeling in the feeling > aggregate, cravings and ignorance in the sankhara aggregates, > formations are in the sankhara aggregatas as kamma etc. > > > Ken O > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39574 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 10:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: renunciation Hi Mike, op 07-12-2004 21:29 schreef m. nease op mlnease@z...: > I've read the Sangitisutta; is the > commentary available on the internet? N: If so it would be on Tipitaka Net. I have trouble there to decode. http://www.tipitaka.org/tipitaka/booklistframe2.html. It is only in Pali, I like hard cover. Nina. 39575 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 10:46am Subject: Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... Hi Howard, op 07-12-2004 21:25 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: >>> The eightfold noble path >>> , a reality, cannot be a paramattha dhamma, can it >> N: They are cetasikas, sankhaarakkhandha. > ====================== > What is the "they" you are referring to, Nina? N:Very good point! The factors of the eightfold Path that have to be developed. There is no other eightfold Path than these cetasikas. The Path is not something abstract we think about, no, it is to be developed now. What? Right view and the rest. When we want to know what something really is we have to ask ourselves: is it citta, cetasika, rupa or nibbana? I just saw your post to Connie: but the right speech etc. are virati cetasikas. Right effort is sammavaayama; the four right efforts are aspects of that, but it is viriya cetasika. Right thinking, vitakka, yes it has those aspects that you mention. But as factor of the Path it assists right understanding and touches the nama or rupa which is the object, so that right view can see it as it is. They all assist right view, otherwise they are not factors of the eightfold Path. Take right concentration, right: wholesome, that can be of jhana. But in order to be concentration of the eightfold Path it has to accompany right view and its object is nama or rupa. I am not speaking now of the lokuttara magga. Nina. 39576 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 10:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Larry, I like what you say: one could look directly and see that belief in self is not self. This is straight, not speculation. Also a wrong view of self is a conditioned dhamma, we had such views formerly, maybe for many aeons. The latent tendency of wrong view conditions its arising. Nina. op 08-12-2004 05:31 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > Similarly, if there is a belief in self one could argue that that belief > is wrong on ontological grounds or one could look directly and see that > belief in self is not self. Ontological arguments are useful but they > aren't real. 39577 From: Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 5:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities Hi, Connie - In a message dated 12/8/04 1:41:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, connieparker@i... writes: > H: Now, a separate matter is that of whether the path factors really are > all cetasikas. In several cases, one has to strain, squirm, and contort to > see it that way. > > C: Being blind, I expect to have to go through all that to see anything > Buddha pointed out - painting lessons in braille. No matter how many > times I touch 'green' moss or envy or any other green piece experience, > the dots just don't all connect for me. > > ==================== Well, of course, I used the word 'see' figuratively, meaning "understand". With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39578 From: Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 6:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities Hi, Connie - In a message dated 12/8/04 1:41:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, connieparker@i... writes: > H: The path factors that I do not see as paramattha dhammas unless one > takes them to mean something quite different from what they are called and > different from how they are talked about in the suttas themselves, are the > following: right thinking or intention or resolve (This is specifically > defined by the Buddha as "Being resolved on renunciation, on freedom from > ill-will, on harmlessness), and hence, it consists of several things, and > so is not a paramattha dhamma), right speech (speech is a conventional > phenomenon), right action (conventional - the Buddha defines it as > follows: "Abstaining from taking life, abstaining from stealing, > abstaining from unchastity," which makes this also consist of several > phenomena, and thus not a paramattha dhamma), right livelihood (livelihood > is a conventional phenomenon, and the Buddha specifies which livelihoods > are wrong), and right effort (the Buddha defines this as consisting of > several conventional activities - four to be exact, and it is thus not a > paramattha dhamma). > > C: Uh... right intention? Cetana is not a path factor. =================== The term samma-sankappo is often translated as "right intention". With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39579 From: Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 6:07am Subject: Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... Hi, Nina - I am short of time at the moment. I just want you to know that I appreciate this reply, and intend to give it appropriate study. I want to delve into this carefully. With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/8/04 1:51:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: > > Hi Howard, > op 07-12-2004 21:25 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > > >>>The eightfold noble path > >>>, a reality, cannot be a paramattha dhamma, can it > >>N: They are cetasikas, sankhaarakkhandha. > > >====================== > >What is the "they" you are referring to, Nina? > N:Very good point! The factors of the eightfold Path that have to be > developed. There is no other eightfold Path than these cetasikas. The Path > is not something abstract we think about, no, it is to be developed now. > What? Right view and the rest. > When we want to know what something really is we have to ask ourselves: is > it citta, cetasika, rupa or nibbana? > I just saw your post to Connie: but the right speech etc. are virati > cetasikas. Right effort is sammavaayama; the four right efforts are aspects > of that, but it is viriya cetasika. Right thinking, vitakka, yes it has > those aspects that you mention. But as factor of the Path it assists right > understanding and touches the nama or rupa which is the object, so that > right view can see it as it is. They all assist right view, otherwise they > are not factors of the eightfold Path. Take right concentration, right: > wholesome, that can be of jhana. But in order to be concentration of the > eightfold Path it has to accompany right view and its object is nama or > rupa. I am not speaking now of the lokuttara magga. > > Nina. > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39580 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 11:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Guarding the sense doors (was: Re: kusala and akusala) Hi Howard, op 08-12-2004 12:32 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > Due to cultivating the mind and carefully monitoring its > functioning in the processing of input, including eye-door input, certain > conceptual processing was avoided. He did *see* a woman, but he didn't "see" a > woman - > he didn't cognize one. The work was mental, not visual. (Of course, a monk > further along in practice, wouldn't even need to engage in that sort of mental > censorship, but could "see" a woman without craving resulting.) N: We should not forget that he was skilled at jhana and was just then and there becoming an arahat. The seeing saw visible object and there was no thinking with absorption in the nimitta. Nina. 39581 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 11:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Guarding the sense doors (was: Re: kusala and akusala) Hi Howard, op 08-12-2004 12:20 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > for the eyes don't avert on their own - the mind > does the directing. N: I agree with what you and Phil are saying. We do not have to look at all that the media offer us, what is the use? One step further: the citta is conditioned and can be seen as: not me. It is not my mind, but it is difficult for all of us to really understand this, not just understand this in theory. Listening to Dhamma, reading suttas, right friendship, all this made understanding grow and it is understanding that sees the danger of akusala. Let us never forget anatta, otherwise we cling all the time to: I should do this or that. Nina. 39582 From: Hugo Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 0:19pm Subject: Off-line for a while To All, I have really enjoyed the time here, but the list is just too active and I can't keep up. I am planning some vacation time which will of course lead me to be off-line for a while. I don't want to even think about how much e-mail I would have acumulated. Righ now I have more than 55 conversation, yes, conversations, not emails (that would be more than 200 emails I guess), that I haven't even started to read. Thanks to everybody for your replies, questions, feedback, etc. :-) So, read you later. May you be free from suffering. May you be happy. -- Hugo 39583 From: Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 8:19am Subject: Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... Hi, Nina - In a message dated 12/8/04 1:51:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: > Hi Howard, > op 07-12-2004 21:25 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > > >>>The eightfold noble path > >>>, a reality, cannot be a paramattha dhamma, can it > >>N: They are cetasikas, sankhaarakkhandha. > > >====================== > >What is the "they" you are referring to, Nina? > N:Very good point! The factors of the eightfold Path that have to be > developed. There is no other eightfold Path than these cetasikas. The Path > is not something abstract we think about, no, it is to be developed now. > What? Right view and the rest. > When we want to know what something really is we have to ask ourselves: is > it citta, cetasika, rupa or nibbana? > I just saw your post to Connie: but the right speech etc. are virati > cetasikas. Right effort is sammavaayama; the four right efforts are aspects > of that, but it is viriya cetasika. Right thinking, vitakka, yes it has > those aspects that you mention. But as factor of the Path it assists right > understanding and touches the nama or rupa which is the object, so that > right view can see it as it is. They all assist right view, otherwise they > are not factors of the eightfold Path. Take right concentration, right: > wholesome, that can be of jhana. But in order to be concentration of the > eightfold Path it has to accompany right view and its object is nama or > rupa. I am not speaking now of the lokuttara magga. > > Nina. > > ======================= I understand virati cetasikas to be events of abstaining from akusala actions, and these are not the ongoing, conventional versions, but the momentary acts of abstention, sort of cetanas-in-action. That makes sense to me. I see that as taking care of right action, right speech, and right livelihood. Right thinking is something I find more problematical, but I'll hold that in abeyance. This is pretty darn good, Nina! You have taken care of this issue as far as the path factors are concerned quite excellently! I thank you. As far as "the path" in its entirety, that's another matter, it seems to me, but I'll hold that in abeyance along with right thinking. (If you could come close to what you've done with the path factors on the other items I mentioned, including anatta, anicca, and idappaccayata and the various relations discussed in the Patthana, and you will have "converted" me on this issue! ;-) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39584 From: Andrew Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 2:35pm Subject: Things the Tathagata has not declared Hi folks During my evening read of Dhamma last night, I came across SN II 12 (Bodhi p 680)- a conversation between Mahakassapa and Sariputta. Sariputta asks whether after death the Tathagata exists/does not exist/both exists & does not exist/neither exists nor not exists. Mahakassapa answers that the Tathagata did not declare these things "because this is unbeneficial, irrelevant to the fundamentals of the holy life, and does not lead to revulsion, to dispassion, to cessation, to peace, to direct knowledge, to enlightenment, to Nibbana." Is anyone aware of any reference where it is said that the Tathagata did not declare whether dhammas exist or not exist for the reasons listed by Mahakassapa? I know this concerns the good old ontology issue: when faced with those who believed "nothing exists", why didn't the Buddha tell them that issues of existence/nonexistence are "unbeneficial, irrelevant to the fundamentals of the holy life ..."? Best wishes Andrew 39585 From: plnao Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 3:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Off-line for a while Hi Hugo I've enjoyed reading your posts. You know, there's no need to try to read all the threads. I certainly can't, and don't. I guess that could mean redundancy in my questions or comments at times, but no big deal, I'm sure. In any case, you hope decide to come back soon. Metta, Phil 39586 From: buddhatrue Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 3:24pm Subject: Re: Off-line for a while Friend Hugo, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Hugo wrote: > To All, > > I have really enjoyed the time here, but the list is just too active > and I can't keep up. I am planning some vacation time which will of > course lead me to be off-line for a while. > > May you be free from suffering. > May you be happy. > -- > Hugo Please, now is not the time to leave. Hang in there a bit longer. I know it is tough; it is tough for me also; but the rewards could be very great for you. Take a chance. :-) Metta, James 39587 From: Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 4:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Andrew: "Larry I think your point is too subtle and has gone over my head, sorry. When the Buddha said "feeling ... I too say that it exists" (see Rob K's post 39350), he was using an ontological argument. He took an ontological position that feeling, among other things, exists. In other suttas, he may have said "feeling is not-self". But if the true Dhamma says that feeling exists, surely insight (at least the full understanding of abandoning or 'pahanaparinna) must know this?" Hi Andrew, I agree if you agree that 'knowing' isn't mental proliferation. My only point was that insight isn't conceptual but ontological statements are. The Buddha made ontological statements and I think there are reasonable arguments based on those statements by later commentators, including us. But these statements and arguments aren't satipatthana. In order for insight to arise we have to look at what we are clinging to in actuality, not just in theory. If we are clinging to philosophy then maybe we should look at a particular instance of this clinging. Sati will do the rest. Larry 39588 From: antony272b2 Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 5:36pm Subject: [dsg] Guarding the sense doors (was: Re: kusala and akusala) Dear Phil, To clarify: "On looking at her the thera noticed her teeth. Since he had been contemplating the skeleton, the whole body of the woman appeared as a heap of bones. Here is an alternative link (search for teeth) http://www.buddhanet.net/filelib/therabud/mahasipt.zip May you be well and happy, antony. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "plnao" wrote: > > > Hi Antony, and Howard and James, and all... > > That link didn't work, unfortunately, Antony. > > Antony > He didn't see a woman! He only saw teeth! He said afterwards that > he > > didn't know if it was a man or a woman. > > But then you say this wasn't quite right? Could you clarify please? > May you be well and happy, antony. 39589 From: Antony Woods Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 5:56pm Subject: Re: Guarding the sense doors (was: Re: kusala and akusala) Dear Phil, Buddha taught about “The Noble Power” (commentary follows see link): Monks, it is good for a monk if, from time to time: He perceives the repulsive in the unrepulsive, If he perceives the repulsive in the repulsive, If he perceives the repulsive in both the unrepulsive and the repulsive, If he perceives the unrepulsive in both the repulsive and the unrepulsive, If he avoids both the repulsive and the unrepulsive (aspects), and dwells in equanimity, mindful and clear comprehending. http://www.geocities.com/ekchew.geo/rootsofgoodandevilC5.html What a wonderful skill to develop! It should help when I look in the mirror May you be well and happy, Antony. 39590 From: antony272b2 Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 6:59pm Subject: [dsg] Guarding the sense doors (was: Re: kusala and akusala) Dear Howard (and Phil), You wrote: > Howard: > Of course, sometimes it also does involve averting the eyes. > It all depends on the state of one's mind as to how one needs to respond. When > the mind is extremely vulnerable, the eyes need to turn away. The battle is > still a mental one, however, for the eyes don't avert on their own - the mind > does the directing. Prevention is better than cure. Instead of averting the eyes after seeing a beautiful lady etc one could adopt the "looking down a plough-yokes length" practice so that the problematic visual object is not seen in the first place (and so you don't trip over or step on innocent ants). May you be well and happy, Antony. 39591 From: plnao Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 7:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Guarding the sense doors (was: Re: kusala and akusala) Hi Antony, and all > Buddha taught about ŵhe Noble Power¡¦(commentary follows see link): > > Monks, it is good for a monk if, from time to time: > > He perceives the repulsive in the unrepulsive, > If he perceives the repulsive in the repulsive, > If he perceives the repulsive in both the unrepulsive and the repulsive, > If he perceives the unrepulsive in both the repulsive and the unrepulsive, > If he avoids both the repulsive and the unrepulsive (aspects), and > dwells in equanimity, mindful and clear comprehending. > http://www.geocities.com/ekchew.geo/rootsofgoodandevilC5.html Like many people who first come across this teaching, I had an adverse reaction to it at first. We don't want to think of people as repulsive, it's so degrading etc. (This is the same sort of thinking that makes many people in the west uncomfortable with the terms "defilements.") But I've become more comfortable with it and find it arising at times to help me out. I think this teaching can help us both with detachment from sensual pleasures and equanimity towards aging and death. I like the sutta that describes the Buddha's early years, in which he realizes "if I should be repelled by that which I am subject to, that would be unfitting" or words to that effect. > What a wonderful skill to develop! > It should help when I look in the mirror Join the club. This morning I had to take a photo for an ID card and went to one of the machines. The result was so ghastly and cadaverous looking I almost shelled out another $7, but then realized what vanity was involved. So now I have a portable cemetery contemplation photo for use wherever I am! Thanks for this and the other links. Metta, Phil 39592 From: Antony Woods Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 7:54pm Subject: Guarding the sense doors (was: Re: kusala and akusala) Dear Howard, You wrote (full passage attached): >The point was not to censor or control what sense data enter the various >sense doors… What do you mean by censor? I found these definitions: “to examine (as a publication or film) in order to suppress or delete any contents considered (morally, politically or otherwise) objectionable” http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=censor What we are discussing is self-censorship, which I would define as, regarding the mental action of turning towards the object (I don’t know if my meaning is the same as the Abhidhamma term?), reflecting after these mental actions (MN 61) and if they are unwholesome (harming one’s mind) “then you should feel distressed, ashamed, and disgusted with it” and exercise restraint in the future. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn061.html Also defined: “The hypothetical agent in the unconscious mind that is responsible for suppressing unconscious thoughts and wishes” http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=censor My Satipatthana Vipassana teacher wrote: The Removal of the Censor - An attitude of acceptance of all thoughts, feelings, emotions and sensations into awareness without discrimination or selection. http://www.buddhanet.net/filelib/medbud/artattn.zip So I am confused. I’ll post this now. Any help appreciated. May you be well and happy, Antony. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > I believe that what the Buddha called guarding the senses actually >came down to guarding only one sense, the mind. This, I believe is what >right effort is about. The point was not to censor or control what sense >data enter the various sense doors, but to monitor the mind with regard to >its qualitities and activities, so that akusala qualities and activities >not yet arisen are avoided, akusala ones already arisen are abandoned, >kusala ones not yet arisen are encouraged, and kusala ones already arisen >are sustained and increased. The critical occasions for doing this are when >content arises at any sense door. > >With metta, >Howard > 39593 From: Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 3:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Guarding the sense doors (was: Re: kusala and akusala) Hi, Antony - In a message dated 12/8/04 10:56:36 PM Eastern Standard Time, antony272b@h... writes: > Dear Howard, > > You wrote (full passage attached): > > >The point was not to censor or control what sense data enter the various > >sense doors… > > What do you mean by censor? > > I found these definitions: > > “to examine (as a publication or film) in order to suppress or delete any > contents considered (morally, politically or otherwise) objectionableâ€? > http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=censor > > What we are discussing is self-censorship, which I would define as, > regarding the mental action of turning towards the object (I don’t know if > my meaning is the same as the Abhidhamma term?), reflecting after these > mental actions (MN 61) and if they are unwholesome (harming one’s mind) > “then you should feel distressed, ashamed, and disgusted with itâ€? and > exercise restraint in the future. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn061.html > > Also defined: > > “The hypothetical agent in the unconscious mind that is responsible for > suppressing unconscious thoughts and wishesâ€? > http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=censor > > My Satipatthana Vipassana teacher wrote: > > The Removal of the Censor - An attitude of acceptance of all thoughts, > feelings, emotions and sensations into awareness without discrimination > or selection. > http://www.buddhanet.net/filelib/medbud/artattn.zip > > So I am confused. I’ll post this now. Any help appreciated. > > May you be well and happy, > > Antony. > ======================== I mean by 'censor' what you mean by censor. What I said was "The point was not to censor or control what sense data enter the various sense doors." That is correct. The main point is to censor our own mental reactions. On occasion, as I agreed, it is prudent to not put oneself in a position to witness certain phenomena that we are overly vulnerable to. But generally, whatever arises at the sense doors simply does so, with our intervention being either impossible or of little effect. In any case, a mere sense-door object such as visible object is neither wholesome nor unwholesome. It is sate of mind that is wholesome or not. It is our reactions too oooosense-door contact that count the most. And it is they that primarily require our monitoring and often our censoring. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39594 From: plnao Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 10:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Guarding the sense doors (was: Re: kusala and akusala) Hello Again, Antony > http://www.geocities.com/ekchew.geo/rootsofgoodandevilC5.html What a wonderful book! Thank you so much. It will help me a lot. I recommend it to anyone who would like a straightforward, energizing refresher on the six roots. ("The Roots of Good and Evil" by Nyanaponika Thera.) Metta, Phil 39595 From: plnao Date: Wed Dec 8, 2004 11:12pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Guarding the sense doors (was: Re: kusala and akusala) Hello again, all Here's a link to the whole book. http://www.geocities.com/ekchew.geo/rootsofgoodandevilC.html Metta, Phil ----- Original Message ----- From: "plnao" To: Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 3:51 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Guarding the sense doors (was: Re: kusala and akusala) > > > Hello Again, Antony > > > http://www.geocities.com/ekchew.geo/rootsofgoodandevilC5.html > > > What a wonderful book! 39596 From: jwromeijn Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 1:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Dear all A quote I already used in a discussion with Rob M some monts ago about 'ontology' A very important remark of Ven. Nyanaponika in his "Abhidhamma Studies": ".. in wat sense can the Abhidhamma be called a philosophy? Let us take a rough division of philosophy in phenomenology and ontology, and briefly define them als follows: Phenomenology deals, as the name implies, with 'phenomena', that is, with the world of internal and external experiences. Ontology, or metaphysiscs, inquires into the existence and nature of an essence, or ultimate principle, underlying the phenomenal world. … The Abhidhamma doubtlessly belongs to the first of these two divisions of philosophy, that is to phenomenology. Even that fundamental Abhidhamma term dhamma, which includes corporeal as well as mental 'things', may well be rendered by 'phenomena' …" (p. 19/20) It should be noted that Bhikkhu Bodhi in his introduction to the book of Ven. Nyanaponika (fourth edition) shows himself more a ontologist: "If however, we understand ontology in a wider sense as the philosophical discipline concerned with determining what realyy exists, with discriminating between the real and the apparent, then we could justly claim that the Abhidhamma is build upon an ontological vision." ( p. XVI). I prefer Nyanaponika's words Metta Joop 39597 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 4:03am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 162 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, We have discussed dhammas at atomic level, at elementary level. Dhammas are citta or consciousness, cetasika or mental factors which support consciousness, rupa or matters or materials which are the nature that never have consciousness, and nibbana, which is an absolute peace. Atomic level here means 'basic characteristic'. Pannatti has also been explained in old Dhamma Thread posts. Even though it is not an ultimate reality, it is also a dhamma that we can sense through our mind-sense-door. Atom does not exist singly with few exceptions. Examples are oxygen, hydrogen, nitrogen. These are elements. There are no atoms unless they are reacted in some way. An atom of hydrogen links with another atom and makes a hydrogen molecule. So do in other cases like nitrogen gas molecule, oxygen gas molecule and many other elements. Dhamma atom does not exist singly with few exceptions. Like other molecules, dhamma molecules are made up of dhamma atoms. Examples are 10 dhamma molecules of pancavinnana cittas or 10 5-sense- consciousness. They are made up of one atom of dhamma called 'citta' or consciousness and 7 atoms of cetasikas or 7 mental factors. There are 121 total cittas. And we have discussed 121 dhamma molecules. We have already discussed on 28 paramattha rupas or 28 ultimate realities rupas. Molecules are the smallest working unit. 3 atoms of hydrogen and 1 atom of nitrogen makes a molecule of amonia when there are right conditions for arising of molecule like heat. NH3 is amonia. When this molecule is combined with carboxylic acid, new molecule becomes an amino acid. When amino acids are linked with a chemical bond called peptide, they become polypeptides. When there are many polypeptides, they become protein molecule. When protein molecules are structured in different kinds of folding like primary folding, secondary folding, tertiary folding, quarternary folding, each has different function of their own. Dhamma molecule 121 cittas may or may exist singly. Mostly they do not exist singly. Exception here is 4 vipaka namakkhandhas or resultant mental bodies of formless brahmas or arupa brahmas. Otherwise, all dhamma molecules are in one or other ways linked with other dhamma molecules in a complex way. Nama dhamma always have to depend on rupa dhamma with a few exception. Before going deep into these complex structures of dhamma, reviews on different classifications of cittas will help to understand dhammas. This is especially right for next step of Dhamma explanation on functions of different cittas. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39598 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 4:14am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 163 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 121 total cittas. They are realities. At any given time, there is a citta internally. Internally means that there is a citta at any given time, the whole of which may be sensed by self within. This is called ajjhatta dhamma or dhamma that exists internally. There are limitless, countless, external dhammas outside of the viewers. These dhammas are called bahiddha dhammas. Whether internally or externally, at any given time there is at least a citta. This citta is one of 121 total cittas ( 121 dhamma molecules made up of 1 atom of pure citta and different combinations of different cetasikas or mental factors ). These 121 cittas can be classified into 5 different groups depending on what vedana cetasika they have. Actually vedana is an atom of dhamma and it is a cetasika. But it cannot arise alone. All 121 cittas have a vedana cetasika or feeling factor. Depending on the type of feeling, 121 cittas are classified into 5 different groups. They are 1. 62 somanassa cittas or consciousness with mental joy. 2. 1 sukha citta or citta with physical pleasure 3. 1 dukkha citta or citta with physical pain 4. 2 domanassa cittas or cittas with mental displeasure 5. 55 upekkha cittas or consciousness with indifferent feeling. ------ 121 cittas. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39599 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 5:34am Subject: [dsg] Guarding the sense doors (was: Re: kusala and akusala) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Antony - > I mean by 'censor' what you mean by censor. What I said was "The point > was not to censor or control what sense data enter the various sense doors." > That is correct. The main point is to censor our own mental reactions. Friend Howard and All, What we should always keep in mind is that the Buddha was an ascetic. As such, he did actively censor what his senses encountered and encouraged the same type of behavior for his sangha. There are some Vinaya precepts which apply to this: keeping the eyes lowered when in inhabited areas (eye door), not wearing colognes, perfumes, or garlands (nose door), not being selective in which foods to eat (tongue door), not sleeping on high and luxurious beds or wearing robes made of fine materials (body door), not listening to music or singing (ear door), and not participating in idle chatter (mind door). As laypeople, we probably break all of these precepts quite frequently; I know that I do. That is why the householder life is "dusty". However, even as householders we can take steps to try to limit the types of things our senses encounter. A good, recent example from this group is Phil and his issues with the war in Iraq. He found that watching and reading the news increased the defilements in his mind. He studied what the Buddha taught in regards to this, gave the matter a great deal of thought and effort, and finally decided to stop watching and reading the news. That was a very wise choice in my opinion. Some may think that he should continue to watch the news and train his mind not to react to what he sees, and eventually he probably will be able to do that, but why make things harder than they have to be? Sometimes the best choice is simply to limit what the senses encounter. I believe that this is part of what it means to `guard the senses'. However, it isn't the only part. Guarding the senses also means to be mindful of what enters the sense doors, determine if what is entering is increasing the defilements or contributing to a wholesome state of mind, and direct the mind to not attend to what increases the defilements and to attend to what increases wholesomeness. This is a completely internal process, in the mind, and doesn't require a manipulation of one's environment. So, in conclusion, I believe that guarding the senses is both an internal and an external process and that both aspects are needed, in different combinations at different times, to purify the mind. Metta, James 39600 From: Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 3:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi, Joop - In a message dated 12/9/04 4:21:05 AM Eastern Standard Time, jwromeijn@y... writes: > Dear all > > A quote I already used in a discussion with Rob M some monts ago > about 'ontology' > > A very important remark of Ven. Nyanaponika in his "Abhidhamma > Studies": > ".. in wat sense can the Abhidhamma be called a philosophy? Let us > take a rough division of philosophy in phenomenology and ontology, > and briefly define them als follows: Phenomenology deals, as the name > implies, with 'phenomena', that is, with the world of internal and > external experiences. Ontology, or metaphysiscs, inquires into the > existence and nature of an essence, or ultimate principle, underlying > the phenomenal world. … The Abhidhamma doubtlessly belongs to the > first of these two divisions of philosophy, that is to phenomenology. > Even that fundamental Abhidhamma term dhamma, which includes > corporeal as well as mental 'things', may well be rendered > by 'phenomena' …" (p. 19/20) > It should be noted that Bhikkhu Bodhi in his introduction to the book > of Ven. Nyanaponika (fourth edition) shows himself more a > ontologist: "If however, we understand ontology in a wider sense as > the philosophical discipline concerned with determining what realyy > exists, with discriminating between the real and the apparent, then > we could justly claim that the Abhidhamma is build upon an > ontological vision." ( p. XVI). > > I prefer Nyanaponika's words -------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, so do I, as I am a rather radical phenomenalist, myself, taking the perspective that only "the experienced" or at least "conditionally able to be experienced" is of any pragmatic concern. (I will lump these two together as "the experiential".) I question that one can even ascribe any meaning to "existence" that is not based in the experiential. For example, and this is a very conventional example, where the "existence" I speak of is far less than ultimate, so please, nobody get in an uproar about it! ;-): When someone says that the sun exists, yet I cannot see it, as the window in this room faces the wrong way, I will not disagree, because existence of an alleged something means to me the possibility of certain experiential events occurring provided that certain other experiential events occur, such as, in this example, "If I, or someone, were outside and were to look up, I, or that other person, would see the sun", or "If I were to look out a different window, I would see the sun", or, to be very fanciful, "If I were to enter the 4th jhana, then fly through space, I could touch the sun with my outstretched hand! ;-) Another example that is less fanciful and also closer to the "paramatthic": Some one tells me the desk top is hard (i.e., hardness exists as a feature of what I conventionally refer to as "the desk top"), and I agree this is so. Why? Because what I mean by the hardness existing is merely, to use conventional language, that if "I" (or "someone") were to "touch the desktop", I (or that someone) would experience hardness (i.e., hardness would arise in the mindstream). The main point I am making is that 'existence' is a term I use for direct experience or the conditioned possibility thereof. That is, any "existence" that is meaningful comes down to the experiential. I never countenance existence independent of the experiential, because such is, in principle, beyond verification or refutation, and is thus merely groundless conceptualization. So, for me, ontology is based in phenomenology. BTW, I put this forward, not to open up a renewed discussion or debate of the virtues and/or deficits in such a radical phenomenalist view, a discussion which by now really wearies me, but just to point out that there are perspectives from which the ontology/phenomenology distinction is not so easily made. ------------------------------------------ > > Metta > > Joop > > ======================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39601 From: Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 3:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Guarding the sense doors (was: Re: kusala and akusala) Hi, James - The points you raise in the following are correct and well made. I also spoke to some extent in this direction, with regard to inputs to which one is particularly vulnerable, but you have corrected here a bit of an excess in my formulation, bring it closer to a middle point. Well done. :-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/9/04 8:39:31 AM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > >Hi, Antony - > > > I mean by 'censor' what you mean by censor. What I said > was "The point > >was not to censor or control what sense data enter the various > sense doors." > >That is correct. The main point is to censor our own mental > reactions. > > Friend Howard and All, > > What we should always keep in mind is that the Buddha was an > ascetic. As such, he did actively censor what his senses > encountered and encouraged the same type of behavior for his > sangha. There are some Vinaya precepts which apply to this: keeping > the eyes lowered when in inhabited areas (eye door), not wearing > colognes, perfumes, or garlands (nose door), not being selective in > which foods to eat (tongue door), not sleeping on high and luxurious > beds or wearing robes made of fine materials (body door), not > listening to music or singing (ear door), and not participating in > idle chatter (mind door). > > As laypeople, we probably break all of these precepts quite > frequently; I know that I do. That is why the householder life > is "dusty". However, even as householders we can take steps to try > to limit the types of things our senses encounter. ===================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39602 From: ashkenn2k Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 8:54am Subject: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... Hi Howard Right Thinking as explained in Dispeller of Delusion (Sammohavinodani) 554. In the description of Right Thinking, "escaped from sense desire" is nekkama-sankappo (thinking of reunication); "escape from ill will" is avyapada-sankappo ("thinking of non-ill-will); "escaped from cruelty" is avihimsa-sankappo (thinking of non-cruelty). Herein applied thought of renunication arises destroying and cutting away the foundation of applied thought of sense desire; likewise applied though t of non-ill-will for applied thought of ill-will; and applied thought of non-cruelty applied thought of cruelty..... 555. Herein the meditator, for the purpose of destroying the foundation of applied thought of sense desire, comprehends either the applied thought of sense desire and any other formation. Then at the moment of insight, thinking which is associated with insight arise in him effecting the destroying and the cutting away of the foundation of applied thought of sense desire though substitution by opposite qualities. Pursuing insight, he reaches the path......[My note - the passage is the same just substituting the applied thought of sense desire with ill will and cruetly] Ken O 39603 From: Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 4:23am Subject: Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... Hi, Ken - In a message dated 12/9/04 12:04:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: > Right Thinking as explained in Dispeller of Delusion (Sammohavinodani) > 554. In the description of Right Thinking, "escaped from sense > desire" is nekkama-sankappo (thinking of reunication); "escape from > ill will" is avyapada-sankappo ("thinking of non-ill-will); "escaped > from cruelty" is avihimsa-sankappo (thinking of non-cruelty). Herein > applied thought of renunication arises destroying and cutting away the > foundation of applied thought of sense desire; likewise applied though > t of non-ill-will for applied thought of ill-will; and applied thought > of non-cruelty applied thought of cruelty..... > > 555. Herein the meditator, for the purpose of destroying the > foundation of applied thought of sense desire, comprehends either the > applied thought of sense desire and any other formation. Then at the > moment of insight, thinking which is associated with insight arise in > him effecting the destroying and the cutting away of the foundation of > applied thought of sense desire though substitution by opposite > qualities. Pursuing insight, he reaches the path......[My note - the > passage is the same just substituting the applied thought of sense > desire with ill will and cruetly] > ==================== Thank you for this. Okay - this presents right thought, not as a single dhamma, but as a group of four dhammas. That's fine. The only thing that is a bit disconcerting is this business of *thinking* of renunciation, non-ill-will, and non-cruelty. It doesn't sound very "paramatthic" to me. Analogically, thinking of hardness is a mental activity involving concept, even though hardness itself is not concept. And thinking of renunciation etc would be of the same sort. This is why I believe that in the context of samma-samkappo, a better translation than "right thinking" is "right intention". The intention or impulse to renunciation or non-ill-will or non-cruelty is, in each case, a momentary paramattha dhamma rather different from the "thinking" of these things. How one translates fro the Pali is incredibly important, I believe. With metta, Howard With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39604 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 10:08am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 164 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 5 groups of cittas. They are grouped into 5 separate entity depending on what type of feeling they have or what kind of vedana cetasika arises with them. 1. 62 somanassa cittas (consciousness with mental pleasure) 2. 1 sukha citta (consciousness with physical pleasure) 3. 1 dukkha citta (consciousness with physical pain/displeasure) 4. 2 domanassa cittas (consciousness with mental displeasure) 5. 55 upekkha cittas (consciousness with indifferent feeling) Please refer back to 'citta' portion. 62 somanassa cittas are 1. 4 somanassa lobha mula cittas 2. 1 somansaa santirana citta 3. 1 ahetuka kiriya, hasituppada citta 4.12 kama somanassa cittas ( half of 24 kama sobhana cittas) 5.11 1st jhana cittas ( 3 mundane and 8 supramundane ) 6.11 2nd jhana cittas ( ,, ,, ) 7.11 3rd jhana cittas ( ,, ,, ) 8.11 4th jhana cittas ( ,, ,, ) ---------- 62 somanassa cittas. 1 sukha citta is 'sukha saha gatam ahetuka kusala vipaka kayavinnana citta. 1 dukkha citta is 'dukkha saha gatam ahetuka akusala vipaka kayavinnana citta. 2 domanassa cittas are 1. domanassa saha gatam patigha sampayuttam asankharika citta 2. domanassa saha gatam patigha sampayuttam sasankharika citta 55 upekkha cittas are 1. 4 upekkha saha gatam lobha mula cittas 2. 2 moha mula cittas 3. 8 of 10 pancavinnana cittas after exclusion of 2 kayavinnana cittas 4. 2 sampaticchana cittas 5. 2 santirana cittas 6. 2 ahetuka kiria cittas ( panca- and mano- dvaravajjana cittas ) 7.12 kama upekkha cittas ( half of 24 kama sobhana cittas ) 8.11 5th jhana cittas ( 3 mundane and 8 supramundane ) 9.12 arupavacara cittas ------- 55 upekkha cittas These 121 cittas are dhamma molecules. They fall into 5 groups. 62 somanassa cittas, 1 sukha citta, 1 dukkha citta, 2 domanassa cittas and 55 upekkha cittas. They have five groups because one atom of dhamma in each of cittas has different qualities in different cittas. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39605 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 11:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Dear Friend James, op 07-12-2004 22:57 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@y...: > James: Okay, here is where we get to the important issue: Nina, can > you direct your cittas to ignore the input from any of the > doorways? N: I cannot direct cittas, and if I believe so it is the idea of self coming in. J:.... To my understanding, the point of > satipathanna is to gain control of the sense doors. N: The question is how, when, and which dhamma is doing the controlling. Our first issue was: why is Kh Sujin stressing seeing and visible object. Instead of speaking about control of the senses, I would rather keep to this issue. Maybe in this way I clarify what is meant. And we avoid long debates!! I can render what we discussed in India, but it has not sunk in sufficiently yet. I find visible object difficult, this seems to last longer than the other sense objects. And on account of this I am more lost in the ocean of concepts. Kh. Sujin said: we see each other only for a short time, life is short, and this is a bitter medicine, it is the dukkha of life. How short? Shorter than we ever thought. Visible object is only there for an extremely short moment, it falls away and never comes back. It can never be the same any more. When you close your eyes and then open them, something appears that was not there before: visible object, or colour, we can name it anything, but it is just what appears through the eyesense. It is experienced by seeing. When you open your eyes there is seeing, and seeing is dependent on conditions. Nobody can make it arise. It seems that you see people, but that is already thinking, and each moment falls away. When understanding develops it can see dukkha in the deepest sense: the arising and falling away of seeing, visible object, thinking and all dhammas. This must lead to detachment. One cannot force sati to be aware of visible object, but if understanding realizes that sati arises because of its own condiitons, there will be less clinging to it. Understanding that there is no one in visible object is very lonely. But it can be learnt by gradually getting used to the characteristic of visible object. I appreciate more now K.S. IV, Second Fifty, By Migajala §63, the words: Dwelling alone, dwelling alone. ATI transl: Nina. 39606 From: Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 6:27am Subject: The Problem of Relations Hi, all - I find myself obsessing a bit about this topic. There are many, many relations (and properties), some of which are central to the Dhamma such as relations of conditionality and the properties of anatta and anicca that are clearly "realities" in some sense. But, on the other hand, it is most unclear to me exactly what sort of "things" these actually are and in what sense they are "realities". They arecertainly not phenomena in the same sense as paramattha dhammas. Some would say they are merely concepts. Certainly that are not entities of any sort. I have no problem, myself, with considering them to be important conventional realities, because I don't dismiss conventional realities as such, ipso facto, to be fiction, but others here think differently about concepts. I would appreciate feedback on this matter. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39607 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 11:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Roots of Good and Evil. Hello Phil, op 09-12-2004 07:51 schreef plnao op plnao@j...: >> http://www.geocities.com/ekchew.geo/rootsofgoodandevilC5.html > > ("The Roots of Good and Evil" by > Nyanaponika Thera.) N: I use it a lot, I have it as a booklet. It is very good, excellent text quotes. Nina. 39608 From: Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 8:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations In a message dated 12/9/2004 11:33:34 AM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: Hi, all - I find myself obsessing a bit about this topic. There are many, many relations (and properties), some of which are central to the Dhamma such as relations of conditionality and the properties of anatta and anicca that are clearly "realities" in some sense. But, on the other hand, it is most unclear to me exactly what sort of "things" these actually are and in what sense they are "realities". They arecertainly not phenomena in the same sense as paramattha dhammas. Some would say they are merely concepts. Certainly that are not entities of any sort. I have no problem, myself, with considering them to be important conventional realities, because I don't dismiss conventional realities as such, ipso facto, to be fiction, but others here think differently about concepts. I would appreciate feedback on this matter. With metta, Howard Hi Howard 1) I think not just "some" relations are central to the Dhamma...they all are. They all ultimately support each other and form the conditions we experience. 2) Anatta and anicca are not properties or realities. They are an evaluation of the way phenomena operate. I.E., all conditioned things are impermanent, but there is no "thing" of impermanence. All things are not-self. But there is no "thing" of not-self. To say that phenomena are impermanent and no-self is the truth. This is not to say there is a phenomena of impermanence or no-self. Impermanence and no-self are not phenomena, they describe phenomena. There are structures or energy formations that continuously fluctuate based on what other structures/energies are doing. Its all relative. This interacting energy is what is really arises and ceases...or perhaps better thought of as "transforms." This can be called "conditionality." It is this that is impermanent and no-self. (The lack of conditionality is not impermanent because impermanent doesn't apply. There is no 'thing' to be impermanent. But no-self still applies to Nibbana because no 'thing' is still no-self.) 3) I don't believe in conventional or ultimate realities. There are just deeper levels of understanding. One thing is as real as another. TG 39609 From: Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 9:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations Hi, TG - In a message dated 12/9/04 4:15:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > Hi Howard > > 1) I think not just "some" relations are central to the Dhamma...they all > are. They all ultimately support each other and form the conditions we > experience. > ------------------------------- Howard: Yes. Relations in general lie at the core of what is real. When I say that some are central to the Dhamma I only mean that they are prominent in the teaching. -------------------------------- > > 2) Anatta and anicca are not properties or realities. They are an > evaluation > of the way phenomena operate. I.E., all conditioned things are impermanent, > > but there is no "thing" of impermanence. All things are not-self. But > there > is no "thing" of not-self. > ---------------------------------- Howard: Yes, I think that is so. Now there is still a sense in which anatta and anicca are "realities". The sense is that *it is true* that no conditioned dhammas last and no dhammas have self-existence or core. But notice how I have formulated this. There was no mention of properties. There were just denials that point out absences. This, perhaps, helps explain the matter. Anatta and anicca are, indeed, just concepts, but they are important ones that point to absences. --------------------------------- > > To say that phenomena are impermanent and no-self is the truth. This is not > > to say there is a phenomena of impermanence or no-self. Impermanence and > no-self are not phenomena, they describe phenomena. > ----------------------------------- Howard: Yes, they are concepts. But look at how important concepts are. They are essential for non-arahants to know the way things are. ------------------------------------ > > There are structures or energy formations that continuously fluctuate based > on what other structures/energies are doing. Its all relative. This > interacting energy is what is really arises and ceases...or perhaps better > thought of > as "transforms." This can be called "conditionality." It is this that is > impermanent and no-self. (The lack of conditionality is not impermanent > because > impermanent doesn't apply. There is no 'thing' to be impermanent. But > no-self > still applies to Nibbana because no 'thing' is still no-self.) > --------------------------------------- Howard: This also tends to characterize relations as concepts. They are concepts that serve to illuminate the way things are, but they are not phenomena of any sort themselves. This all seems to say to me that if we think that knowing paramattha dhammas alone provides full knowledge of reality, we are quite wrong. It is starting to look to me that at least for non-arahants, in whom transcendental wisdom has not been fully aroused, concept is absolutely indispensable for understanding what is what. --------------------------------------- > > 3) I don't believe in conventional or ultimate realities. There are just > deeper levels of understanding. One thing is as real as another. > ---------------------------------------- Howard: I think that distinguishing between ultimate and conventional is valid. I see these as different types of experiential content, requiring differing modes of cognition. I see a genuine difference between, for example, hardness and a tree. Both are experiential content, with hardness being more fundamental, not requiring sankharic processing. But I think that to identify paramattha dhammas as realities and sammuti-dhammas as unrealities is an error of overstatement. There may be many sorts of phenomena, all "existing" in various ways. ---------------------------------------- > > TG > ===================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39610 From: Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 9:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations In a message dated 12/9/2004 2:10:08 PM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: Howard: Yes, they are concepts. But look at how important concepts are. They are essential for non-arahants to know the way things are. Howard, I think that is absolutely true. Although concepts may be irrelevant for an enlightened mind, they are indispensable assets in developing insight and the Buddha utilizes concepts extensively. TG 39611 From: m. nease Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 2:30pm Subject: Re: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" [Sukin] Hi Howard, ----- Original Message ----- From: "mlnease" To: Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 7:44 AM Subject: Fwd: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" [Sukin] >> Thanks for this clarification--so phassa and vedanaa > are 'infected'? > =================== > Yes. As I see it, for a worldling - for any non-arahant, for > that > matter - phassa is the contact of an apparent subject with an > apparent object > through a connecting sense-door, and vedana is "I like" or "I > dislike" or "I am > neutral about". Neither is uninfected. I've given this some thought and this is how it seems to me: Cetasikas such as phassa and vedanaa don't infect and are not infected. Because they're universal they can arise with cittas that are defiled by akusala cetasikas such as moha and lobha etc. So as I see it it is the citta that is defiled, not the cetasikas (though the defilements are cetasikas). Also, since rebirth-linking citta even in the sense-realm (i.e 'favorable') is 'infected' with latent moha and lobha, these (latent) defilements must be the results of akusala kamma. Since kamma strong enough to condition results only occurs in the javana process, this suggests to me that there is some direct correlation between the (akusala) javana process and pa.ticcasamuppaada--exactly what that is I don't know even theorectically yet. I look forward to finding out. Thanks for the impetus to consider this further. mike 39612 From: plnao Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 3:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Guarding the sense doors (was: Re: kusala and akusala) Hi James, and all > As laypeople, we probably break all of these precepts quite > frequently; I know that I do. That is why the householder life > is "dusty". This "dusty" is very helpful - is it your own choice of words, or from a sutta - or ancient commentary? (wink) However, even as householders we can take steps to try > to limit the types of things our senses encounter. A good, recent > example from this group is Phil and his issues with the war in > Iraq. He found that watching and reading the news increased the > defilements in his mind. He studied what the Buddha taught in > regards to this, gave the matter a great deal of thought and effort, > and finally decided to stop watching and reading the news. That was > a very wise choice in my opinion. Thanks, James. It was, for sure. And I'm still doing quite well on the resolve to steer clear of the news. There is no doubt that cutting off the news in a strict, averting the eyes way is helping me here. (One day I was flipping around wtih the TV remote-control - what a fine invention Mara came up with there- and Bush's grinning mug appeared. I quite literally averted my eyes. >Some may think that he should > continue to watch the news and train his mind not to react to what > he sees, and eventually he probably will be able to do that, but why > make things harder than they have to be? Sometimes the best choice > is simply to limit what the senses encounter. Yes, there is a time for it. And the time will pass. Wisdom will know when that is. In the meantime, there will be backslides. There have been a few. The backslides are important. Testing out the water to see if it's safe to swim. Oops. Not yet. That shark is still devouring me. Of course, we have to remember that the visible objects that present themselves in life due so due to conditions. They are vipaka. That might be a point we don't agree on, but that's OK. In any case, good to remember that we can't completely limit what the senses encounter if we have busy daily lives. But, yes, for people who need band-aids, as Sarah put it, a little bit of will power guided by wisdom. > I believe that this is part of what it means to `guard the senses'. > However, it isn't the only part. Guarding the senses also means to > be mindful of what enters the sense doors, determine if what is > entering is increasing the defilements or contributing to a > wholesome state of mind, and direct the mind to not attend to what > increases the defilements and to attend to what increases > wholesomeness. I am still learning about wise attention, yoniso-manasikara. Clearly it is so central to all this. This morning I read this: "Now, friends, what is the cause and condition whereby unarisen hatred arises and arisen hatred becomes stronger and more powerful? A repulsive object. In him who gives unwise attention to a repulsive object, unarisen hatres ill arise, and hatred that has already arisen will grow stronger and more powerful." (AN 3:68) Of course, unwise attention is not something that we can control so completely. You write above "be mindful of what enters the sense doors, determine if what is entering is increasing the defilements or contributing to a wholesome state of mind, and direct the mind to not attend to what increases the defilements and to attend to what increases wholesomeness." You have put it very succinctly, James! However, we should also remember that all this usually happens in a wink of an eye and it would be wishful thinking to think that we (or panna, as I prefer to say) can so easily prevent ourselves from being led astray. But we know we're headed in the right direction when we can at least write what you've written above! And you have cultivated wise attention much more than I have, I imagine, so the above wholesome process goes on a lot more in you than it does in me. Very encouraging James. Thanks again. >This is a completely internal process, in the mind, > and doesn't require a manipulation of one's environment. > > So, in conclusion, I believe that guarding the senses is both an > internal and an external process and that both aspects are needed, > in different combinations at different times, to purify the mind. Yes, well said! Metta, Phil 39613 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 3:50pm Subject: Re: kusala and akusala. Friend Nina, Thank you so much for replying to my post. It appears that you are quite busy with your writings and travels nowadasy and I sincerely appreciate the efforts you make to reply to my inquiries. I hope that I am not burdening you in any way. Thanks again! Nina: I cannot direct cittas, and if I believe so it is the idea of self coming in. James: But Nina, we already established that there isn't any such thing as "self". You wrote that to me very specifically in your last post. But now you are telling me what a "self" is and is not capable of doing. This appears to be the dichotomy you have in your mind: Self: Can Direct Cittas; Non-Self: Cannot Direct Cittas. How can you have such a clear-cut definition for something that doesn't exist? To my understanding, directing cittas is simply volition that would be a characteristic of the citta itself. Doesn't volition exist in Buddhism? Why do you think that volition requires a "self"? Nina: The question is how, when, and which dhamma is doing the controlling. James: That is a good question. I think the dhamma we are discussing is citta, consciousness. To my understanding, cittas can contain volition. If one asks "Who does the controlling?" that type of question is a non-issue. At a basic (khanda) level, there is no "who" doing the controlling; there are only cittas doing the controlling, consciousness. It is a non-personal phenomenon. Nina: Our first issue was: why is Kh Sujin stressing seeing and visible object. Instead of speaking about control of the senses, I would rather keep to this issue. Maybe in this way I clarify what is meant. And we avoid long debates!! James: I'm sorry if I have vexed you but I thought that these subjects were related. I thought that you had already explained sufficiently why Kh Sujin stresses visible object and I decided to let that subject drop. It wasn't a very important subject anyway. However, I had decided to pick up on the last issue that you touched upon, about closing the eyes and controlling the senses, and asked further about that. I did not mean to confuse the issue or to prolong any type of debate with my inquiry. Please accept my sincere apologies; there is no need to continue this discussion if you would rather not. Metta, James 39614 From: Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 11:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" [Sukin]n Hi, Mike - In a message dated 12/9/04 5:36:31 PM Eastern Standard Time, mlnease@z... writes: > I've given this some thought and this is how it seems to me: Cetasikas > such > as phassa and vedanaa don't infect and are not infected. Because they're > universal they can arise with cittas that are defiled by akusala cetasikas > such as moha and lobha etc. So as I see it it is the citta that is defiled, > not the cetasikas (though the defilements are cetasikas). > ------------------------------------------- Howard: Your thoughts on this are interesting, Mike, but I'm not certain I agree. You are saying that it is the citta that is defiled due to certain cetasikas being defiled, but not the phassa or vedana. Now, there are two senses to 'citta'. One of these senses is vi~n~nana, the "awareness operation". Now, vi~n~nana I *do* see as infected in the non-arahant, because, for such a "being" it is a knowing that is infected by the sense of subjectivity (or knowing subject/agent). But vi~n~nana is but one link of D.O., and as far as "infection" is concerned, it, like all the other links, performs a store-and-forward (or transmission) function - it is a carrier. Because of the atta-infection tranmitted from avijja through sankhara into vi~n~nana, it cascades from there through all the subsequent links of D.O. chain. The other sense is of "mindstate". But a mindstate is not a paramattha dhamma. It is a collection of co-occuring phenomena - citta, cetasikas, and maybe a rupa as arammana, which means that a citta is not a direct element of experience. To say that it is infected is just a manner of speaking, where it is actually the dhammas that underlie it which are infected. ----------------------------------------- Also, since > > rebirth-linking citta even in the sense-realm (i.e 'favorable') is > 'infected' with latent moha and lobha, > these (latent) defilements must be the results of akusala kamma. Since > kamma strong enough to condition results only occurs in the javana process, > this suggests to me that there is > some direct correlation between the (akusala) javana process and > pa.ticcasamuppaada--exactly what that is I don't know even theorectically > yet. I look forward to finding out. > ---------------------------------------- Howard: I don't think any of us will *really* find out what is what with regard to the Dhamma until there is no longer any sense of a "we" who finds out! That being the case, may we both, and all others here, soon "find out"! ;-) ------------------------------------------ > > Thanks for the impetus to consider this further. > > mike > > ============================ With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39615 From: Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 11:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi, James (and Nina) - In a message dated 12/9/04 6:52:42 PM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > Nina: I cannot direct cittas, and if I believe so it is the idea of > self coming in. > > James: But Nina, we already established that there isn't any such > thing as "self". You wrote that to me very specifically in your > last post. But now you are telling me what a "self" is and is not > capable of doing. This appears to be the dichotomy you have in your > mind: Self: Can Direct Cittas; Non-Self: Cannot Direct Cittas. How > can you have such a clear-cut definition for something that doesn't > exist? To my understanding, directing cittas is simply volition > that would be a characteristic of the citta itself. Doesn't > volition exist in Buddhism? Why do you think that volition requires > a "self"? > ======================= Two points, James: 1) While I don't think that cetana can outright direct or command content of consciousness, it can frequently and powerfully influence what arises. So, I agree with you on this. 2) But you should re-read Nina's sentence. She wasn't talking of self being involved, but of the *idea* of self being involved. Her point, whether one agrees with it or not, was that the belief that one can direct cittas involves the *idea* of self. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39616 From: m. nease Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 4:47pm Subject: Knocking Out Akusala Dear Friends, A friend sent this interesting experiment in the practicality of eliminating akusala dhammas by attacking them with the swatter of pa~n~naa or any other kusala: http://www.shockhaber.com/zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.htm Good luck. mike p.s. No actual beings were killed in the production of this program. ---------- 39617 From: Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 3:52pm Subject: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations Hi again, TG - Just another thought or two about anatta, anicca, and about relations. As I think about these a bit more, I do think it may not be wrong to think of them as realities. I think that they are mind-door realities. It occurs to me that any specific instances of anatta and anicca are simply absences. Now "anatta in general" and "anicca in general", of course, are just (well grounded) concepts or abstractions. That's no different from "hardness in general" being just (well grounded) concept, whereas specific occurrences of hardness are experiential realities. Many specific absences are quite real, and directly observable. I think, for example, of silence, particularly a silence following upon a sustained period of great noise. It seems we can hear the silence, but we don't really hear it. It is a mind-door object. Sometimes nibbana, itself, is said to be an absence, though I'm not quite sure that is the correct perspective. In any case, anatta and anicca are indirectly known by inference and directly knowable by wisdom, and this latter alone makes them realities. As concerns relations, I think that it may well make sense to consider that they are events of a sort, specifically types of multi-phenomenal, and often trans-temporal, events. (For an example drawn from Abhidhamma, the co-occuring of cetasikas within a given mindstate is a multi-phenomenal, but single-time event.) I think that every specific relation holding between/among phenomena is exactly a multi-phenomenal event, and often trans-temporal as well. And, like absences, they are all known through the mind door, indirectly through inference or directly by wisdom. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39618 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 9:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations Hi Howard, Visuddhimagga VIII, note 11, gives thewhole list of all the types of concepts. Rob K, also gave this before. I also had a correspondance with Larry about the three characteristics and a passage of the Vis. But it takes time to look it up. It was said that these are bound up with paramattha dhammas. Yes, I found some texts, but I have to finish first Larry's Vis. passage which is long. Besides, my father becomes 104 and we give a house concert in about 8 days. I have to rehearse a lot. Nina. op 09-12-2004 20:27 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > There are many, many > relations (and properties), some of which are central to the Dhamma such as > relations of conditionality and the properties of anatta and anicca that are > clearly "realities" in some sense. But, on the other hand, it is most unclear > to > me exactly what sort of "things" these actually are and in what sense they are > "realities". They arecertainly not phenomena in the same sense as paramattha > dhammas. Some would say they are merely concepts. 39619 From: Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 5:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations Hi, Nina - In a message dated 12/10/04 12:06:45 AM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: > Hi Howard, > Visuddhimagga VIII, note 11, gives thewhole list of all the types of > concepts. Rob K, also gave this before. > I also had a correspondance with Larry about the three characteristics and a > passage of the Vis. But it takes time to look it up. It was said that these > are bound up with paramattha dhammas. > Yes, I found some texts, but I have to finish first Larry's Vis. passage > which is long. Besides, my father becomes 104 and we give a house concert in > about 8 days. I have to rehearse a lot. > Nina. > ======================= Thank you for this, Nina. The list of kinds of concepts is interesting to me! I will look it up for sure. (I own the Vsdm.) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39620 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 10:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations Hi Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > Thank you for this, Nina. The list of kinds of concepts is > interesting > to me! I will look it up for sure. (I own the Vsdm.) > ... See also the many posts under 'Concepts' in UP which include this list from the Vism and Abhidammattha Sangaha, such as this one: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/3494 Metta, Sarah ====== 39621 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 11:55pm Subject: Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... Hi Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Howard: > Yes, it is. And it is a reality, is it not? But it is not, > itself, a > paramattha dhamma, is it? > ------------------------------------- .... S: the ti-lakkhana are characteristics of realities or of paramattha dhammas. They cannot be known apart from those dhammas (realities). .... > Certainly relations do not hold independently of what are related > by > them. The relations are also not identical with what they relate. The > relations > are not imagined. They are, thus, "realities". > But they also are not paramattha dhammas. .... S: These are excellent points/questions. Let me give the example I quoted before again and then add a little more this time: Quote from U Narada's introduction to the Patthana translation (PTS): "Just as the hotness of chilli is inherent in it and cannot exist apart from it and as the sweetness of sugar is inherent in it and cannot exist apart from it, so also, the conditioning forces inherent in the (conditioning) states cannot exist apart from those states. For example, in root condition, the force of greed, which is one of the six roots, cannot exist apart from that state. Here the root conditioning state is greed and the conditioning force of greed is also greed. Therefore, the force and the state which possesses that force cannot be considered apart from each other." **** S: Greed leads to more greed. We all know that. It accumulates by natural decisive support and other supporting conditions. We refer to these conditions using various concepts to explain how and why greed leads to more greed and to show that this is the nature of such dhammas. In truth, however, there is nothing apart from the conditioning states (here the presently arising greed) and the conditioned ones (here the greed that follows as a consequence). To give another example. We know that cittas (moments of consciousness) follow each other in succession and as we read in the texts, this is by anantara paccaya(proximity condition). Here anatara paccaya is a concept which refers to the nature or characteristics of cittas to succeed each other. In other words, looking at the list of concepts in Vism or CMA, it is a concept of the existent based on the existent. It is a concept about the characteristics of these particular paramattha dhammas (realities) to be conditioned, function and manifest in this way. There is nothing existing or real apart from the conditioning and conditioned states. Even when we come to arammana paccaya which we know includes concepts, we are still talking about the nature of paramattha dhammas. Cittas in the mind door process either experience realities or conceptualise about imaginary objects. The imaginary objects, as you know, are never experienced as realities. The relation merely explains the manner in which the cittas and cetasikas at such a time are conditioned to experience objects, i.e no thinking without an object. .... >There is no khandha > that the > relation of contiguity, for example, belongs to. That relation is > neither > rupa nor vedana nor sankhara nor sa~n~na nor vi~n~nana. .. .... S: Contiguity condition/relation(samanantara paccaya) is identical with anantara paccaya above. Htoo has written about the niyamas or fixed law/natural order of all dhammas. One of these is citta niyama which concerns the sequence of cittas (consciousness) which cannot be altered. The relation or niyama is merely a way of describing the cittas and cetasikas (4 or the 5 khandhas), to explain one of the ways in which they are conditioned to arise. The conditioned nature is an integral aspect of all dhammas (apart from nibbana) and is clearly comprehended directly (not by thinking or calculating) at the second stage of insight. To stress, there is no relation apart from the relating and related realities (paramattha dhammas) here. ... > --------------------------------- > Howard: > The issue is relations, not the related dhammas.... ... S: There is no relation apart from the relating and related dhammas. See above. ... > More problematical is the status of something like > anatta/impersonality. It is either reality or concept, correct? ... S: Or an aspect of reality, like the keyboard I'm using is an aspect or characteristic of the computer. There are also other 'parts' which are integral to its composition. We can't say the keyboard is the computer just as we can't say anatta is a reality or paramattha dhamma on its own. (Nina said she had more from the Vism/Tika to add on this area). ... >If > concept, then, as some here > view concept, it is nothing at all. ... S: Not a concept. ... >If reality, then where does it fit > in? It > does not occur on any list of cetasikas, it is not a rupa, it is not a > citta, > and it is not nibbana. That exhausts the Abhidhammic categories, does it > not? > Something's wrong here! ;-)) ... S: Nothing's wrong, fear not;-)) It fits in to each of those cetasikas, rupas, cittas and nibbana. It is an aspect of all of them, just like dukkha and anicca (apart from nibbana) and just as nama is an aspect of some and rupa an aspect of others. .... > Howard: > You wish to exclude the conventional dhammas, which, by the way, > the > Buddha in the suttas, often included when using the term 'dhamma', ... S: When dhamma includes concepts or conventional dhammas it is never in the context of dhammas to be penetrated or directly known. This is why it's important to read suttas such as the Sabba Sutta carefully and to understand the way conventional terms are used in the Mulapariyaya and other suttas as some of us have been saying. [And......for those bold enough to question the homepage description, this is why we have 'realities' rather than just 'dhammas' there. I think dhammas (realities) would be best and I may be suggesting it at the next Board Meeting, on the beach I hope - looking sunny for Sunday here, if a bit chilly for the waves;-).] Howard, I think all your comments on this whole thread are very useful. I'm glad to consider this area more. I'm snipping now as I have a lot of posts I'm behind on and I've probably written too much already. please repost any of your other concerns/comments in reply if they haven't been addressed. Metta, Sarah ========== 39622 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 0:08am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 69- Perception/Sa~n~naa (p) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.3 Perception(sa~n~naa)contd] ***** Saññå accompanies lokuttara citta which experiences nibbåna and then saññå is also lokuttara. Nibbåna cannot be attained unless conditioned realities are known as they are: as impermanent, dukkha and anattå. We read in the Gradual Sayings (Book of the Tens, Chapter VI, §6, Ideas) about ten kinds of saññå which are of great fruit and are leading to the ‘deathless’, which is nibbåna. The Påli term saññå is here translated as ‘idea’. We read about the ten ‘ideas’ which should be developed: -Monks, these ten ideas, if made to grow and made much of, are of -great fruit, of great profit for plunging into the deathless, for ending -up in the deathless. What ten ideas? -The idea of the foul, of death, of repulsiveness in food, of distaste -for all the world, the idea of impermanence, of dukkha in -impermanence, of not-self in dukkha, the idea of abandoning, of -fading, of ending. -These ten ideas, monks, if made to grow… are of great profit for -plunging into the deathless, for ending up in the deathless. ***** [Ch.3 Perception(sa~n~naa)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 39623 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 0:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 149 ) Dear Htoo, I said I'd get back to you at the beginning of the week, but the list has been very busy and I'm behind on a lot of intended posts. I'm also only slowly catching up now. I appreciate all your DT posts (though as I said before, I personally prefer kings and ministers to atoms and molecules, but that's just me. I also glaze over when I see ontology and phenomenology.. in the context of Dhamma). Just a few comments for now. In this message you wrote: --- htootintnaing wrote: > If 8 lobha mula cittas are well understood, this will be very > valuable to differentiate between joy of lobha mula cittas and joy of > other sobhana cittas. If not careful, even in the middle of > mahakusala cittas vithi vara, lobha mula cittas can arise and the joy > or piti in lobha mula citta may micmic piti of sobhana cittas. .... S: I think this paragraph is a clear description of why it can be helpful to consider these various classifications and details which may seem tedious to us at times;-). If they help us to have a little more understanding of anatta, of conditioned dhammas, of presently arising lobha or of how little is really known, they can be very useful indeed. In a post 2 or 3 days ago to Bhante V, I also quoted from one of your DT's about chanda. You may have missed it. (Let me know off-list if you wish to find it and have trouble). We were discussing non-concrete (anipphanna) rupas before and you kindly followed a couple of links to old posts and Nina provided more references to show they are indeed paramattha dhammas. [Mike, that reference you pointed out in CMA on this is incorrect and BB has said it will be changed for the next edition. Besides the links I gave to Htoo last time on this, pls both see my old post #31743. BB agreed with the conclusions, post #33803. Interesting - re this last post, it also includes a section on dhammaayatana which you (Htoo) and I have discussed before. Dhammaayatana is coming up in my present thread with Howard. In BB's quote I give from CMA in this post, the details are correct and I pointed out they are incorrect in the Nyantiloka dict. They are also incorrect I believe in one of the footnotes to the Sabba Sutta in BB's transl of SN. I may mention this when I have a chance.It's an important point when it comes to the understanding of realities (paramattha dhammas) as opposed to concepts as discussed here at length;-). Oh gosh, htoo, looking at your other message to me, I need to reply to it in context. A couple more brief points here: DT 87. You mention the enemies of lobha are alobha, adosa, amoha, ahirika and anottapa. Surely hiri and ottapa? OOps - I need to call my mother back. I've just become a great-aunt!! Get back to you soon. Metta, Sarah =========== 39624 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 0:35am Subject: Re: kusala and akusala. Friend Howard (and Nina), Howard: 1) While I don't think that cetana can outright direct or command content of consciousness, it can frequently and powerfully influence what arises. So, I agree with you on this. James: I think that we agree also; really, I am having trouble finding the right words to express what I mean. I seem to take the meaning of words from the context in which they are used, but others seem to think that words have an intrinsic meaning. For example, I can use the word `control' and mean a type of control in a conventional sense that is not absolute, while others see the word `control' and immediately start thinking, "ATTA BELIEF! ATTA BELIEF! RED ALERT! RED ALERT!" ;-)) The words have become like hidden landmines and I can barely find a safe word to express my thoughts. Howard: But you should re-read Nina's sentence. She wasn't talking of self being involved, but of the *idea* of self being involved. Her point, whether one agrees with it or not, was that the belief that one can direct cittas involves the *idea* of self. James: I was aware of the content of Nina's sentence. With Nina, in this thread, I am using the Socratic Method, the method of asking questions until the basis for one's thoughts is revealed. I am not trying to debate or to be a `smart ass', I genuinely want to know why she believes this. However, I think I am getting on her nerves with this method of inquiry so it may end soon! ;-)) I really want to know why Nina believes that the directing of cittas translates into a belief in self. The Buddha said that we can determine that the five khandas are not `self' because we cannot say, "Let them be thus'. So, to my way of thinking, a belief in self means that one believes they have absolute control over the five khandas. I don't believe that, and yet I still believe in the value of guarding the senses and directing the senses. For example, I know that I cannot say, "Let my body be like Arnold Schwarzenegger's" and then it will instantly be. But I know that I can change my diet, live at the gym, take steroids (bad idea!) and then my body could become, possibly, like Arnold Schwarzenegger's. Conversely, I cannot say, "Let my mind be free of its defilements. Let me know nibbana!" and then it will instantly be. But I know that if I follow the Eightfold Path, which includes Sila, Samadhi, and Panna, I could possibly know nibbana. I know this because the Buddha said it is possible and I have faith in his teaching. Metta, James 39625 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 0:54am Subject: Guarding the sense doors (was: Re: kusala and akusala) Friend Phil, Phil: This "dusty" is very helpful - is it your own choice of words, or from a sutta - or ancient commentary? (wink) James: It is from a sutta, that is why I put it in quote marks, and I happen to like it also: "Before my Awakening, when I was still an unawakened Bodhisatta, the thought occurred to me: 'The household life is crowded, a dusty road. Life gone forth is the open air. It isn't easy, living in a home, to lead the holy life that is totally perfect, totally pure, a polished shell. What if I, having shaved off my hair & beard and putting on the ochre robe, were to go forth from the home life into homelessness?' http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn036.html Phil: But we know we're headed in the right direction when we can at least write what you've written above! And you have cultivated wise attention much more than I have, I imagine, so the above wholesome process goes on a lot more in you than it does in me. James: Oh Phil, you flatter me. However, I was simply parroting what the Buddha taught (After all, I have read many suttas) and that doesn't reveal anything about the skill of my mental processes. Phil: Very encouraging James. Thanks again. James: You're quite welcome! :-) Metta, James 39626 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 1:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 133 ) Dear Htoo, My nephew and partner have just had a little girl, Amelia. My mother is thrilled to be a great grand-mother! Now back to our discussion. --- htootintnaing wrote: > > Actually they do not arise and do not pass away. What arise and pass > away are these 4 rupa's host. That is 18 salakkhana rupas. .... All conditioned dhammas arise and pass away. The 4 lakkhana rupas - well, see Nina's Vism text she sent. We can't talk about the arising and falling away of lakkhanas I think. This is like Howard's qu - they cannot be said to have the ti-lakkhana themselves, but are aspects of other realities. ... > > Vinattis again. Does it arise and pass away? Need to check. ... S: Yes - all other conditioned dhammas. ... I do not > think vinatti arise and pass away. But vinatti do exist. What arise > and pass away are these 2 vinatti's host that is 18 salakkhana rupas. > > Akasa. Does it arise? Does it pass away? Need to check. I do not > think akasa arises and passes away. What arise and pass away are > akasa's host. .... S: It's also a conditioned dhamma, an element, indirectly conditioned by the same conditions that determine the rupas and falling away as they do. Tell me if you found anything different. .... > > Let us think imaginably. There is the space that astronauts float > around. There are two masses. One is the earth and another is Mar. > The earth did arise. The earth will soon pass away. It is soon. It > will pass away soon. Mar did arise. Mar will one day pass away and > disappear. But the space between the earth and Mar never arise, never > pass away. You might think that that space is real. Actually it is > not. Space does not arise and does not pass away. What arise and pass > away are akasa's host. But akasa does exist and it is a reality. .... S: I find it more helpful to think of akasa as a dhatu, an element or as a subtle rupa included in dhammaayatana. All elements arise and pass away (apart from nibbana of course). Lots of posts on akasa in U.P. I'm trying to avoid pulling out texts now. ... > > Again 3 lahutadis. They do not arise and pass away. Only their host > arise and pass away. But all 3 lahutadi rupas are realities. My idea > seems saying 10 rupa do not exist. No. They are realities and they do > exist. But they do not arise and do not pass away. .... S: If you still think this after Nina's and my earlier posts, let me know and I'll try to find more refs. .... > > The problem is the word 'exist'. Someone may point out what I meant > by 'exist'. When the appropriate can be discovered, I might change to > that word. > > 18 salakkhana rupas , 18 nipphanna rupas arise and fall away. They > have 17 times the life of a citta. ... S: Yes. ... > > 10 rupas exist. But they do not arise and do not fall away. How do > you think? Any previous discussion on these? ... S: sabbe sankhara anicca. Sabbe sankhara includes these rupas. From the comy to Abhidammattha Sangaha: "All this materiality (i.e 28 rupas), in as much as it is without motivations, has causal conditions, is associated with the taints, is conditioned.....etc". .... By the way, on dukkha and your earlier comments which I can't find now, but I know other friends questioned. I think you might have been right. You said, I believe, that the lokuttara cittas are not included in dukkha in the 4 Noble Truths. I heard K.Sujin explain the same, saying this was because these cittas couldn't be known prior to being experienced or sth along those lines. Other bits in brief: DT97 you say that if ditthi has been eradicated by sotapatti magga nana, all following lobha cittas will be accompanied by mana (conceit). I think you mean, *may* be accompanied by mana, but definitely not by ditthi. DT110 you say (and have said before) that adosa cetasika is metta. I prefer to say that metta is adosa cetasika, because adosa isn't necessarily metta. For example, there can be adosa without other beings as object and then it can't be called metta as I understand. Btw, DT134, I'm interested in aniyati yogii - very interested in this post and term. I'm not familiar with it, pls say more. I'll leave it there for now. Pls know I really appreciate the DT thread, even though I'm often way behind with it;-). Metta, Sarah ======= 39627 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 1:42am Subject: Re: Di.t.thijukamma, was Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Dear Mike & Nina, Mike, you've made some great contributions of late, esp. one on dosa to KenO & Hugo I thought (#39312). Also on habitual kamma. K.Sujin stresses that for kamma to be kamma patha, it's not just one moment, but so many accumulated kammas. --- "m. nease" wrote: > > Nibbaana arises for only one moment, I think (when 'it' would > naturally be > > 'marked' by sa~n~naa as that is one of sa~n~naa's functions)--I don't > see > > why the reviewing after nibbaana might not take a concept (the memory > of > > nibbaana?) as an object--but I really don't know. > N: I think this is what Sarah and I discussed: not so classifiable > object: > navattabbamaarama.na. > Thus, we cannot say it is a concept, it is reality, but reviewed > afterwards > by kaamaavacara citta with pañña, not directly experienced by lokuttara > citta. I should verify this with Sarah. ... S: Yes. A reality. The same characteristic experienced by these kaamaavacara cittas with panna. Also the defilements eradicated etc. It's not thinking. K.Sujin says (and I'm pretty sure I've read it in Dispeller too) that when navattabbamaarama.na is understood with this first example, the other examples can be understood, such as how panna undestands sense objects or namas just fallen away etc etc. Mike, see 'navattabbamaarama.na' in UP. It can refer to realities by way of navattabbaraarama.na, as in these examples, or to concepts as in nimitta experienced by jhanas etc. The sign you and Larry were discussing and the function of sanna. The sign can be either concept or reality. Sanna marks a 'sign' at every moment. Essential for any accumulating rightly or wrongly. Btw, thx for your comment and witty remarks about how you'd LOVE not to mind at all what is conditioned etc and how do you start and the slow motion towards the trees....;-) Another wag!! Nina, thanks for your extra comment and feed back on the letter to BB and the two different stems of jhana. I was hoping you'd point out any mistakes or add any further comments. I've also been appreciating all your Vism and other posts. I'm sure you must be very glad to have had broadband this last week while the list was so busy!! Metta, Sarah p.s Mike, have you heard anything of particular interest on the India recordings? Can you listen to these Buddhists while you do your Nudist work;-) ======== 39628 From: jwromeijn Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 1:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Dear Howard (and all) Howard: I am a rather radical phenomenalist, myself, taking the perspective that only "the experienced" or at least "conditionally able to be experienced" is of any pragmatic concern. Joop: Well, I'm not, or not exactly. I am a "non-ontologist": we don't know how the world is in a objective sense, we only have theories about the world. And from time to time (I hope) we check that theories to control or they still are correct; or better; if they still are usefull. We to be honest, that was not what Nyanaponika was talking about. He stated that we should understand the Teachtings of the Buddha (and the Abhidhamma) on a phenomenological way, that we should not think that the Buddha was making ontological statements. But in a way we agree again: "hardness" (as one of the four great so- called elements) is not a "element" in the sense of "building block" but an aspect of experiencing things made of material. I don't know if I understand the rest of your message, because your conclusion "So, for me, ontology is based in phenomenology" surprised me. My private definition of "ontology" is: the world exists and is describable in a objective way, even if I don't exist. About such an ontology I had to be agnostic, is that your conclusion too? Another question: what is the conseuence of this for our buddhistic path ? I don't know; on this moment I think: I'm really not a orthodox Theravadin, I'm going to study Mahayana. Metta Joop 39629 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 1:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Greetings, new member here. Hi Guy (& RobM & Naresh), You joined us at a very busy time on the list and I really appreciated both your introduction and also RobM's kind welcome. (This helps us a lot, Rob;-)). --- gy_richard wrote: > Just wanted to introduce myself,(as suggested). My name is Guy and I > live in a big bowl of samsara in southern USA. I have been reading > and trying to practice Buddhism on and off for about 20 years now. I > have done a lot of reading, and I admit very little practice, but I > think my motivation is finally set to sit on a daily basis. .... S: We have a few other members from the south. Whereabouts are you? Sounds like you must have considered Buddhism a lot and I hope you find the list useful. ... > In the last 8 months or so I have become very interested in the > Theravada tradition, and feel more of a sense of "time to settle in > and do the work". I sometimes think about where my mind would be > today if I would have stuck to meditation from the start all those > years ago, and do not want to look back on the second have of my life > in the same way. .... S: You'll find some here feel like you and others who might say the opposite - :-/ I'll let you learn about this in due course. .... > > So... I do not pretend to have a vast wealth of knowledge about the > Buddha's teachings and will no doubt benefit more from this group > more than you will from me, but, if I have one piece of advice for > anyone it is this...if you are the type, like me, who fell in love > with the Dhamma and loves to read, but you find yourself putting off > the actual practice of sitting meditation, don't put it off any > longer!! Study without practice, in my opinion, is not Buddhism or > being a Buddhist. So put the books down for a while and sit! Besides, > what's the point of knowing the teachings if we don't put them in to > practice right? .... S: As I hinted, there are many different ideas of what 'practice' means here. Somewhere in UP there is a neat summary from Howard on this, but I can't think under what category (Connie, Chris...any ideas). You could in any case, go to UP and run down the topics to see if there is one of interest. Maybe 'Traditions' or 'Practice' or 'New to the list'. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts Anyway, I look forward to any further comments from you. Pls don't be put off by the volume or dissenting opinions here. Metta, Sarah p.s Naresh, a welcome from me too. You had so many from others that I could see you were well settled. Do you live in South America? Curacao?? Pls keep up your good questions and remember to trim posts!! ============================================================= 39630 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 3:46am Subject: Prolific Posters Hello all, For interests sake, I thought I'd see just who our most prolific members are. There are approximately 31 members who have sent in posts to the List from the 1st December, up to this moment, and my estimate (allowing for different time zones and any miscounting) is: Upasaka Howard 83 Nina 55 KenO 52 Hugo 39 Phil 37 RobM 36 Htoo 35 Sarah 33 Larry 31 Mike 29 James 24 Andrew 22 Bhante Vimalaramsi 18 Obviously at only 7, I'm letting the side down quite badly. :-) metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 39631 From: plnao Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 4:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 69- Perception/Sa~n~naa (p) Hello all > We read in the Gradual Sayings (Book of the > Tens, Chapter VI, §6, Ideas) about ten kinds of saññå which are > of great fruit and are leading to the 'deathless', which is nibbåna. > The Påli term saññå is here translated as 'idea'. We read about > the ten 'ideas' which should be developed: > > -Monks, these ten ideas, if made to grow and made much of, are of > -great fruit, of great profit for plunging into the deathless, for ending > -up in the deathless. What ten ideas? > > -The idea of the foul, of death, of repulsiveness in food, of distaste > -for all the world, the idea of impermanence, of dukkha in > -impermanence, of not-self in dukkha, the idea of abandoning, of > -fading, of ending. > > -These ten ideas, monks, if made to grow. are of great profit for > -plunging into the deathless, for ending up in the deathless. I'm confused by this. If sanna is a universal cetasika, performing a vital function to mark an object so that it can be remembered again, how can it be an idea? And these ten ideas, these themes of contemplation, aren't they concepts? I can certainly see the value of them (I was reading about the removal of distracting thoughts through using some similar ones) but I don't see how they relate to a functional cetasika like sanna... Thanks in advance. Metta, Phil 39632 From: jwromeijn Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 5:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Howard, ... Hallo Howard, Sarah, Nina and all One concrete question: Can one just say 'concept' as abstraction; or had one always to say the 'concept of person x' ? Does a concept exist outside the mind of a person, as such ? I think the answer is no; I think a concept nearly the same as a theory. Metta Joop 39633 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 5:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Prolific Posters Hi Chris, --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Obviously at only 7, I'm letting the side down quite badly. :-) .... Does that mean your Cooran report or More Tales from India are in their way? Have you been able to listen to any of the recordings? Any parts of the discussions that were of special interest/significance for you? Metta, Sarah p.s Perhaps we should think of a special 'Stamina Award' for Howard in at no 1.?? ================== 39634 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 6:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Prolific Posters Dear Christine, Sarah, Howard and All, Here just to give you a smile, number 1 is Upasaka Howard, number 7 is Htoo, number 13 is Bhante. But I am not superstitious. :-) With Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Chris, > > --- christine_forsyth wrote: > > Obviously at only 7, I'm letting the side down quite badly. :-) > .... > Does that mean your Cooran report or More Tales from India are in their > way? > > Have you been able to listen to any of the recordings? Any parts of the > discussions that were of special interest/significance for you? > > Metta, > > Sarah > p.s Perhaps we should think of a special 'Stamina Award' for Howard in at > no 1.?? > ================== 39635 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 6:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 149 ) A couple more brief points here: > DT 87. You mention the enemies of lobha are alobha, adosa, amoha, ahirika > and anottapa. Surely hiri and ottapa? > > OOps - I need to call my mother back. I've just become a great- aunt!! > > Get back to you soon. > > Metta, > > Sarah > =========== ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Sarah, Thanks for your points. Yes. It is obviously 'hiri' and 'ottappa'. Thanks, Htoo Naing 39636 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 7:52am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 165 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are root dhammas. Roots are giving life to trees. They supply with water, minerals, nutrition. When roots are cut up, trees have to die. In Dhamma there are dhammas that have root qualities. They are called root dhammas or hetu. There are 6 hetus. They are lobha, dosa, moha, alobha, adosa, and amoha. In 24 conditions of dhammas, these 6 dhammas serve as root condition or hetu paccaya for other dhammas that depend on them. According to these 6 hetus, 89 total cittas are grouped into 2 major classes. They are ahetuka cittas and sahetuka cittas. Ahetuka cittas do not have any of these 6 hetus. As they do not have beautiful hetus of alobha, adosa, and amoha, these ahetuka cittas are called asobhana cittas or non-beautiful consciousness. There are 18 ahetuka cittas. 18 ahetuka cittas again have two kinds of citta. They are vipaka cittas or resultant consciousness and kiriya cittas or functional consciousness or inoperational consciousness. There are 15 ahetuka vipaka cittas or 15 rootless resultant consciousness. And there are 3 ahetuka kiriya cittas or 3 rootless functionalm consciousness. Again 15 ahetuka vipaka cittas or 15 rootless resultant consciousness have 2 separate groups. 7 cittas of these 15 cittas are the result of past akusala or unwholesome actions and 8 of these 15 cittas are the result of past kusala or wholesome actions. There are 7 ahetuka akusala vipaka cittas. Be careful that all these 7 cittas are vipaka cittas. They are not akusala cittas. If not clear, just reply this post. These 7 ahetuka akusala vipaka cittas are 1. upekkha saha gatam ahetuka akusala vipaka cakkhuvinnana citta The vedana cetasika has the quality of indifferent feeling that is not good or not bad, not extreme. Cakkhu means 'eye'. Vinnana literally means 'particular knowledge'. This citta particualrly knows light and vision. No other citta can do this job. This citta is called cakkhuvinnana citta or 'eye-consciousness'. This is 'consciousness-at-eye'. It is sight-consciousness. Its quality has been discussed repeatedly in the previous posts. This consciousness arises at eye. So it is called eye-consciousness or cakkhuvinnana citta. It does not have any root dhamma. This citta is the result of bad action in the past. So it is called akusala vipaka citta. Other 6 cittas are 2.upekkha saha gatam ahetuka akusala vipaka sotavinnana citta 3.upekkha saha gatam ahetuka akusala vipaka ghanavinnana citta 4.upekkha saha gatam ahetuka akusala vipaka jivhavinnana citta 5.dukkha saha gatam ahetuka akusala vipaka kayavinnana citta 6.upekkha saha gatam ahetuka akusala vipaka sampaticchana citta 7.upekkha saha gatam ahetuka akusala vipaka santirana citta Cakkhuvinnana citta is eye-consciousness. This has been explained. Sotavinnana citta is ear-consciousness. Ghanavinnana citta is nose-consciousness. Jivhavinnana citta is tongue-consciousness. Kayavinnana citta is body-consciousness. Sampaticchana citta is 'receiving consciousness' Santirana citta is 'investigating consciousness'. These again will be explained in the following posts when we go on to functions of cittas. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39637 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 8:12am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 166 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, We are discussing on 89 cittas or 121 cittas and going on different classifications of cittas again. So far we have finished on cittas with different vedana or feeling. They are 62 somanassa cittas or 62 consciousness with mental pleasure, 1 sukha citta, 1 dukkha citta, 2 domanassa cittas or 2 consciousness with mental displeasure, and 55 upekkha cittas or 55 consciousness with indifferent feeling. This is the classification of cittas depending on their accompanying vedana cetasika or feeling. So 62 + 1 + 1 + 2 + 55 = 121 total cittas. We are approaching to another classification. It is classification based on root dhammas or hetu dhamma namely lobha, dosa, moha, alobha, adosa, amoha. In this classification there are 18 ahetuka cittas and 71 sahetuka cittas. Ahetuka means 'without hetu or root' and sahetuka means 'with hetu or root'. In this classification there are 18 ahetuka cittas, 2 ekahetuka cittas, 22 dvihetuka cittas and 47 tihetuka cittas. 18 + 2 + 22 + 47 = 89 total cittas. Eka means 'one' or 'single'. Dvi means 'two' or 'double' and ti means 'three' or 'triple'. So these cittas are cittas without root, cittas with 1 root, cittas with 2 roots and cittas with 3 roots. Regarding 18 ahetuka cittas, we have discussed on 7 ahetuka akusala vipaka cittas. There are 8 ahetuka kusala vipaka cittas. By names they are the same as akusala vipaka and just replace 'akusala' with 'kusala'. Dukkha is replaced by 'sukha' in kayavinnana citta. And there is an extra santirana citta. It is somanassa santirana citta. 1.upekkha saha gatam ahetuka kusala vipaka cakkhuvinnana citta 2.upekkha saha gatam ahetuka kusala vipaka sotavinnana citta 3.upekkha saha gatam ahetuka kusala vipaka ghanavinnana citta 4.upekkha saha gatam ahetuka kusala vipaka jivhavinnana citta 5.sukha saha gatam ahetuka kusala vipaka kayavinnana citta 6.upekkha saha gatam ahetuka kusala vipaka sampaticchana citta 7.somanassa saha gatam ahetuka kusala vipaka santirana citta 8.upekkha saha gatam ahetuka kusala vipaka santirana citta They are eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, receiving-consciousness, joyous-investigating-consciousness and indifferent-investigating- consciousness all of which are the result of past good kamma or wholesome actions in the past. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39638 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 8:25am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 167 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 1. 18 ahetuka cittas ( cittas without any root ) 2. 2 ekahetuka cittas(cittas with only one root) 3. 22 dvihetuka cittas(cittas with 2 roots ) 4. 47 tihetuka cittas (cittas with 3 roots ) Among 18 ahetuka cittas, we have discussed on 15 ahetuka vipaka cittas. There are 3 other ahetuka cittas. These 3 cittas are ahetuka kiriya cittas. Kiriya cittas are functional consciousness and they do not produce or create any kamma by arising of them. Three ahetuka kiriya cittas are 1. upekkha saha gatam ahetuka kiriya pancadvaravajjana citta 2. upekkha saha gatam ahetuka kiriya manodvaravajjana citta 3. somanassa saha gatam ahetuka kiriya hasituppada citta. As their names imply the first 2 cittas are upekkha cittas. They are ahetuka cittas. They are kiriya cittas. These 2 cittas are universal to any being when they are possible to arise. Pancadvaravajjana citta does not arise in asannisattas and arupa brahmas. But hasituppada citta is confined to arahats only. This citta never arise in other beings. This citta is smiling citta of arahats including The Buddha. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39639 From: Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 4:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations [Sarah - Brief] Thanks, Sarah. With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/10/04 1:55:32 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@y... writes: > See also the many posts under 'Concepts' in UP which include this list > from the Vism and Abhidammattha Sangaha, such as this one: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/3494 > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39640 From: plnao Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 9:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 166 ) Hello Htoo > And there is an extra santirana citta. It is somanassa santirana > citta. (snip) > joyous-investigating-consciousness and indifferent-investigating- > consciousness all of which are the result of past good kamma or > wholesome actions in the past. I forget why there is the extra joyous-investigating-consciousness. I could go and check ADL but I will ask you if you don't mind. From the name, I would guess that the object causes joy - so maybe it is some very special object. Now I remember something about Buddha statues, for example. But I have also read somewhere that there is nothing intrinsic in objects that make them wholesome or unwholesome - it all depends on our attention, whether it is yoniso manasikara or ayoniso manasikara. Otherwise objects have no intrinsic wholesomeness or unwholesomeness. Thanks in advance for your feedback. Metta, Phil 39641 From: Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 5:21am Subject: Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... Hi, Sarah - Warning to the casual reader: The following involves a lot of technical analysis and theorizing that may well be disconcerting if not outright upsetting. In a message dated 12/10/04 2:56:58 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@y... writes: > Hi Howard, > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > >Howard: > > Yes, it is. And it is a reality, is it not? But it is not, > >itself, a > >paramattha dhamma, is it? > >------------------------------------- > .... > S: the ti-lakkhana are characteristics of realities or of paramattha > dhammas. They cannot be known apart from those dhammas (realities). > ------------------------------------------ Howard: Mmm. There are lots of things that only occur together but can still be distinguished. It seems to me that if the tilakkhana are neither rupas nor cittas nor cetasikas nor nibbana, then that leaves Abhidhammikas in the position of saying that they are nothing but pa~n~natti, and that they cannot be objects of insight - that satipatthana does not apply to them, and that they are, in fact, nothing at all. It seems to me that either the view on what constitutes "reality" needs to be changed, or an Abhidhammika who takes the "DSG point of view" with regard to concept and reality is forced into an uncomfortable, if not outright upsetting, position. I would love to see a persuasive explanation of why this is not so. (So far, it strikes me as a real problem.) ----------------------------------------------- > .... > > Certainly relations do not hold independently of what are related > >by > >them. The relations are also not identical with what they relate. The > >relations > >are not imagined. They are, thus, "realities". > > But they also are not paramattha dhammas. > .... > S: These are excellent points/questions. Let me give the example I quoted > before again and then add a little more this time: > > Quote from U Narada's introduction to the Patthana translation (PTS): > > "Just as the hotness of chilli is inherent in it and cannot exist apart > from it and as the sweetness of sugar is inherent in it and cannot exist > apart from it, so also, the conditioning forces inherent in the > (conditioning) states cannot exist apart from those states. > ----------------------------------------- Howard: If a conditioning force were a reality, not imagined, then it would be either rupa, citta, cetasika, or nibbana. Also, a "conditioning force", if there were such a beast, would not itself be a relation, but a cause for a relation. In any case, notions of "conditioning forces" at the level of reality must be very suspect. The Buddha replaced the old, substantialist ideas of hidden forces of causality by conditionality, which simply comes down to "When this is, that is, and when this arises, that arises". This is part of what distinguished the Buddha's notion of idappaccayata from the substantialist causality theories of his predecessors. --------------------------------------------- > > For example, in root condition, the force of greed, which is one of the > six roots, cannot exist apart from that state. > ---------------------------------------------- Howard: The force of greed cannot exist apart from *what* state? Greed cannot exist apart from greed? I don't get what is being said here. If by "state" is meant the citta as mindstate, as opposed to citta as the operation of awareness (vi~n~nana), then what exactly is a mindstate? It seems to be a collection consisting of co-occurring awareness (citta in the 1st sense - vi~n~nana), cetasikas, and arammana. But any collection is pa~n~natti. Is then the root condition of greed, as a relation, a relation between a nama dhamma (greed) and a pa~n~natti (the mindstate)? In any case, the *force* of greed, whatever sort of thing that is supposed to be, is not itself a relation. It seems to me that no matter how any of this matter is turned, it doesn't bear scrutiny very well. ------------------------------------------- > > Here the root conditioning state is greed and the conditioning force of > greed is also greed. Therefore, the force and the state which possesses > that force cannot be considered apart from each other." > ------------------------------------------ Howard: Okay, so the "force" terminology is superfluous. We are talking about greed. What is the greed related to by the greed-root-relation, and in exactly what way? That is - what exactly is the relation being talked about, and is that relation merely concept or is it reality? If it is reality, it must fall into one of the categories of rupa, citta, cetasika, and nibbana. ----------------------------------------- > **** > S: Greed leads to more greed. We all know that. It accumulates by natural > decisive support and other supporting conditions. We refer to these > conditions using various concepts to explain how and why greed leads to > more greed and to show that this is the nature of such dhammas. > > In truth, however, there is nothing apart from the conditioning states > (here the presently arising greed) and the conditioned ones (here the > greed that follows as a consequence). --------------------------------------- Howard: Ahh, okay. Here we are starting to zero-in on matters. There is nothing more than the conditioning and conditioned states. That means that *there are no relations*. There are relations only in a manner of speaking. Relations are (well grounded) concepts, and nothing more. Okay. That may well be so! Relations may well be not events of the type I hypothesized, multi-phenomenal and often trans-temporal events. But, then, they are actually nothing at all. We can make true statements of syntactically relational form about dhammas, but we may not countenance such "things" as actual relations. I will definitely buy that! But what does that tell us about concepts? It says to me that at least until we are arahants, there is no proper grasping of reality that does not indispensably depend on concepts. ------------------------------------------------ > > To give another example. We know that cittas (moments of consciousness) > follow each other in succession and as we read in the texts, this is by > anantara paccaya(proximity condition). > > Here anatara paccaya is a concept which refers to the nature or > characteristics of cittas to succeed each other. In other words, looking > at the list of concepts in Vism or CMA, it is a concept of the existent > based on the existent. It is a concept about the characteristics of these > particular paramattha dhammas (realities) to be conditioned, function and > manifest in this way. There is nothing existing or real apart from the > conditioning and conditioned states. > ---------------------------------- Howard: Okay. But look at what would be not known without the concepts that take us beyond these dhammas to their characteristics and the relations among them. The so called characteristics "to be conditioned, function and manifest" in certain ways (of the dhamma, greed, for example) are not the dhamma itself. These are to be known by inference by us. Moreover, these characteristics are actually nothing at all - as you say. They are concept only. All there actually are are the dhammas (e.g., greed). ------------------------------- > > Even when we come to arammana paccaya which we know includes concepts, we > are still talking about the nature of paramattha dhammas. Cittas in the > mind door process either experience realities or conceptualise about > imaginary objects. The imaginary objects, as you know, are never > experienced as realities. The relation merely explains the manner in which > the cittas and cetasikas at such a time are conditioned to experience > objects, i.e no thinking without an object. > .... > >There is no khandha > >that the > >relation of contiguity, for example, belongs to. That relation is > >neither > >rupa nor vedana nor sankhara nor sa~n~na nor vi~n~nana. .. > .... > S: Contiguity condition/relation(samanantara paccaya) is identical with > anantara paccaya above. Htoo has written about the niyamas or fixed > law/natural order of all dhammas. One of these is citta niyama which > concerns the sequence of cittas (consciousness) which cannot be altered. ------------------------------------- Howard: Okay. So you agree that contiguity relation is pa~n~natti. That looks to me like pa~n~natti are essential aspects of "reality", no? If we throw out pa~n~natti as mere illusion, then we throw out the tilakkhana and all properties and relations. Doesn't it start to seem to you, Sarah, that all this analysis is an empty house of cards, and that no matter how we try to describe reality, the description falls apart? It does to me. All that I am starting to see left is that this is a world of empty appearance, with nothing to hold onto, nothing independent, nothing substantial or self-existent, and all worthy only of relinquishment. (Nagarjuna is looking more and more attractive to me at this moment.) --------------------------------------- > > The relation or niyama is merely a way of describing the cittas and > cetasikas (4 or the 5 khandhas), to explain one of the ways in which they > are conditioned to arise. The conditioned nature is an integral aspect of > all dhammas (apart from nibbana) and is clearly comprehended directly (not > by thinking or calculating) at the second stage of insight. > > To stress, there is no relation apart from the relating and related > realities (paramattha dhammas) here. > -------------------------------------- Howard: Okay. I buy that! :-) -------------------------------------- > ... > >--------------------------------- > >Howard: > > The issue is relations, not the related dhammas.... > ... > S: There is no relation apart from the relating and related dhammas. See > above. > ... > > More problematical is the status of something like > >anatta/impersonality. It is either reality or concept, correct? > ... > S: Or an aspect of reality, like the keyboard I'm using is an aspect or > characteristic of the computer. > ------------------------------------ Howard: No not an aspect of reality. It is either pa~n~natti (and hence nothing at all, as that is understood on DSG) or it is paramattha dhamma. ------------------------------------ There are also other 'parts' which are> > integral to its composition. We can't say the keyboard is the computer > just as we can't say anatta is a reality or paramattha dhamma on its own. > (Nina said she had more from the Vism/Tika to add on this area). > ... > >If > >concept, then, as some here > >view concept, it is nothing at all. > ... > S: Not a concept. > --------------------------------------- Howard: If anatta is not pa~n~natti, then it must be either rupa, citta, cetasika, or nibbana. ---------------------------------------- > ... > >If reality, then where does it fit > >in? It > >does not occur on any list of cetasikas, it is not a rupa, it is not a > >citta, > >and it is not nibbana. That exhausts the Abhidhammic categories, does it > >not? > > Something's wrong here! ;-)) > ... > S: Nothing's wrong, fear not;-)) It fits in to each of those cetasikas, > rupas, cittas and nibbana. It is an aspect of all of them, just like > dukkha and anicca (apart from nibbana) and just as nama is an aspect of > some and rupa an aspect of others. ----------------------------------------- Howard: Using the word 'aspect' doesn't shed any light. What particular cetasika is anatta? (It isn't rupa, citta, or nibbana.) In fact, anatta must, just like relations (as you ahve so clearly pointed out), be concept. ---------------------------------------- > .... > >Howard: > > You wish to exclude the conventional dhammas, which, by the way, > >the > >Buddha in the suttas, often included when using the term 'dhamma', > ... > S: When dhamma includes concepts or conventional dhammas it is never in > the context of dhammas to be penetrated or directly known. This is why > it's important to read suttas such as the Sabba Sutta carefully and to > understand the way conventional terms are used in the Mulapariyaya and > other suttas as some of us have been saying. > > [And......for those bold enough to question the homepage description, this > is why we have 'realities' rather than just 'dhammas' there. > > I think dhammas (realities) would be best and I may be suggesting it at > the next Board Meeting, on the beach I hope - looking sunny for Sunday > here, if a bit chilly for the waves;-).] > > Howard, I think all your comments on this whole thread are very useful. > I'm glad to consider this area more. I'm snipping now as I have a lot of > posts I'm behind on and I've probably written too much already. please > repost any of your other concerns/comments in reply if they haven't been > addressed. > ------------------------------------- Howard: In a way, I feel obliged to apologize for pushing with regard to these matters. I'm afraid it may be upsetting to some. But I feel that it is important to scrutinize carefully, and to seriously question in this area. I see some real problems here, and not the least of them being the inherent inadequacy in all analytical, conceptual, inferential schemes, including Abhidhamma. ------------------------------------- > > Metta, > > Sarah > ====================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39642 From: Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 5:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi, James (and Nina) - In a message dated 12/10/04 3:35:40 AM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > > Friend Howard (and Nina), > > Howard: 1) While I don't think that cetana can outright direct or > command content of consciousness, it can frequently and powerfully > influence what arises. So, I agree with you on this. > > James: I think that we agree also; really, I am having trouble > finding the right words to express what I mean. I seem to take the > meaning of words from the context in which they are used, but others > seem to think that words have an intrinsic meaning. For example, I > can use the word `control' and mean a type of control in a > conventional sense that is not absolute, while others see the > word `control' and immediately start thinking, "ATTA BELIEF! ATTA > BELIEF! RED ALERT! RED ALERT!" ;-)) The words have become like > hidden landmines and I can barely find a safe word to express my > thoughts. ----------------------------------- Howard: ;-)) ----------------------------------- > > Howard: But you should re-read Nina's sentence. She wasn't talking > of self being involved, but of the *idea* of self being involved. > Her point, whether one agrees with it or not, was that the belief > that one can direct cittas involves the *idea* of self. > > James: I was aware of the content of Nina's sentence. With Nina, in > this thread, I am using the Socratic Method, the method of asking > questions until the basis for one's thoughts is revealed. I am not > trying to debate or to be a `smart ass', I genuinely want to know > why she believes this. However, I think I am getting on her nerves > with this method of inquiry so it may end soon! ;-)) ------------------------------------- Howard: I didn't think for a second that you were trying to be a "smart ass". I really thought you had misread her sentence. -------------------------------------- > > > I really want to know why Nina believes that the directing of cittas > translates into a belief in self. The Buddha said that we can > determine that the five khandas are not `self' because we cannot > say, "Let them be thus'. So, to my way of thinking, a belief in > self means that one believes they have absolute control over the > five khandas. I don't believe that, and yet I still believe in the > value of guarding the senses and directing the senses. For example, > I know that I cannot say, "Let my body be like Arnold > Schwarzenegger's" and then it will instantly be. But I know that I > can change my diet, live at the gym, take steroids (bad idea!) and > then my body could become, possibly, like Arnold Schwarzenegger's. > Conversely, I cannot say, "Let my mind be free of its defilements. > Let me know nibbana!" and then it will instantly be. But I know > that if I follow the Eightfold Path, which includes Sila, Samadhi, > and Panna, I could possibly know nibbana. I know this because the > Buddha said it is possible and I have faith in his teaching. > ----------------------------------- Howard: We have no differences on this matter. :-) ------------------------------------ > > Metta, James > > ====================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39643 From: Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 5:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi, Joop - In a message dated 12/10/04 4:53:48 AM Eastern Standard Time, jwromeijn@y... writes: > Dear Howard (and all) > > Howard: I am a rather radical phenomenalist, myself, taking the > perspective that only "the experienced" or at least "conditionally > able to be experienced" is of any pragmatic concern. > > Joop: Well, I'm not, or not exactly. I am a "non-ontologist": we > don't know how the world is in a objective sense, we only have > theories about the world. And from time to time (I hope) we check > that theories to control or they still are correct; or better; if > they still are usefull. > > We to be honest, that was not what Nyanaponika was talking about. He > stated that we should understand the Teachtings of the Buddha (and > the Abhidhamma) on a phenomenological way, that we should not think > that the Buddha was making ontological statements. -------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, I agree. My position is an "extreme" phenomenalist position, putting me near to the vijnanavada camp of Vasubandhu (in Mahayana ... shhh! nobody tell! ;-) ------------------------------------ > But in a way we agree again: "hardness" (as one of the four great so- > called elements) is not a "element" in the sense of "building block" > but an aspect of experiencing things made of material. > ------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, hardness is an aspect of direct experience. However, the notion of "material" and "things made of material" is conceptual projection, as I see it. These are not directly knowable, but only hypothesized. ------------------------------------- > > I don't know if I understand the rest of your message, because your > conclusion "So, for me, ontology is based in phenomenology" surprised > me. My private definition of "ontology" is: the world exists and is > describable in a objective way, even if I don't exist. > ------------------------------------- Howard: We differ there. Such a "world", if existent, is in principle unknowable. Perforce, only experience is experienced. For me, only the content of experience is known to "exist", and that is the extent of ontology that I commit to. As I said, my position is extreme. -------------------------------------- About such an > > ontology I had to be agnostic, is that your conclusion too? --------------------------------------- Howard: If I had reason to believe that an "external world" different from and underlying experiential content could be known, then my position would be fully agnostic. In a sense, it is agnostic anyway, for there is no way the existence of such an "external world" could be disproved. But when the existence of an alleged "thing" can, in principle, neither be proved nor disproved, I choose, pragmatically, to wield Occam's razor, and presume the simpler view of non-existence. --------------------------------------- > > Another question: what is the conseuence of this for our buddhistic > path ? > I don't know; on this moment I think: I'm really not a orthodox > Theravadin, I'm going to study Mahayana. > ------------------------------------------ Howard: I do not think my position is at all required. For me, it helps me understand the Dhamma. For others, Abhidhamma does that. ----------------------------------------- > > > Metta > > Joop ======================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39644 From: naresh gurwani Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 9:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] Greetings, new member here. Hi Sarah Yes iam from South America, Curacao, just finding a way to my life , where in US are you from Naresh --- sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Guy (& RobM & Naresh), > > You joined us at a very busy time on the list and I > really appreciated > both your introduction and also RobM's kind welcome. 39645 From: Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 5:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Prolific Posters Hi, Christine - In a message dated 12/10/04 6:48:49 AM Eastern Standard Time, cforsyth1@b... writes: > Hello all, > > For interests sake, I thought I'd see just who our most prolific > members are. There are approximately 31 members who have sent in > posts to the List from the 1st December, up to this moment, and my > estimate (allowing for different time zones and any miscounting) is: > Upasaka Howard 83 Nina 55 KenO 52 Hugo 39 Phil 37 RobM 36 > Htoo 35 Sarah 33 Larry 31 Mike 29 James 24 Andrew 22 Bhante > Vimalaramsi 18 > > Obviously at only 7, I'm letting the side down quite badly. :-) > > metta and peace, > Christine > ======================= Argh!!! ;-)) With prolific metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39646 From: nina Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 11:47am Subject: Vis. XIV, 122 and Tiika Vis. XIV, 122 and Tiika Vis. XIV, 122. At the end of the impulsions, if the object is a very vivid one [52] in the five doors, or is clear in the mind door, then in sense-sphere beings at the end of sense-sphere impulsions resultant consciousness occurs Note 52(taken from the Tiika). ' "A very vivid one" , a very great object, atimahanta, is one with a life of sixteen consciousness moments. For registration consciousness arises with respect to that, not with respect to any other. N: In this case the process of cittas that experience the ruupa runs its full course. As we have seen when the object is great, the object cannot last longer than the javana-cittas. Text Note 52: "Clear" means very evident, and that is only in the sense sphere; for registration (retention) arises with respect to that' (Pm. 479). N: Clear, vibhuuti, refers to an object experienced by cittas in the subsequent mind-door process where also retention consciousness arises. The tadaaramma.na-cittas are kaamaavacara cittas, cittas of the sense-sphere and they arise only in the sensuous planes of existence. They are generated by kamma that is bound up with craving for sense desires. The Tiika explains that the object experienced by the cittas in that process may be very desirable, moderately desirable or undesirable. The javana-cittas which experience an object may be accompanied by happy feeling, unhappy feeling or indifferent feeling. When the javana-cittas are accompanied by unhappy feeling, the tadaaramma.na-cittas that succeed these cannot be accompanied by unhappy feeling since they are vipaakacittas. They cannot, in this case, be accompanied by happy feeling since happy feeling cannot immediately follow upon unhappy feeling. They are accompanied by indifferent feeling. (See Co to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, T.A. p. 142). Text Vis: through any condition it may have obtained such as previous kamma, impulsion consciousness, etc., with desirable, etc., object [53]. Note 53, taken from the Tiika: ' "Previous kamma": this is said in order to show the differences in kinds of registration; for kamma that generates rebirth-linking is not the only kind to generate registration; other kinds of kamma do so too. But the latter generates registration unlike that generatable by the kamma that generates rebirth-liking. N: Kamma other than the kamma which produces rebirth may produce the vipaakacitta that is retention. Note 53: "Impulsion consciousness": this is said in order to show what defines the registration; for it is said, "Registration is definable by impulsion" N: Also the javana-cittas (impulsion) are a condition for the succeeding retention. Note 53: The word "etc." includes rebirth-linking, however; for that is not a condition for registration that is more outstanding than itself. N: The word "etc.", aadi, refers to the Vis. text: It is said that kamma does not produce retention that is more outstanding (more superior, ukka.t.thara) than itself. Mahaa-kusala citta with two roots, for example, does not produce retention with three roots. (See Expositor, p. 356, which gives opinions of different teachers.) This passage shows that there are several intricate conditions for retention. The object experienced by the javana-cittas which may be very desirable, moderately desirable or undesirable and also the feeling accompanying the javana-cittas are factors which combine and are conditions for the type of retention that arises within the process of cittas. Note 53: "Any condition": any condition from among the desirable objects, etc., that has combined (samaveta) to produce the arising of registration' (Pm. 479). Text Vis: [It occurs thus] as one among the eight sense-sphere resultant kinds with root cause (42)-(49) or the three resultant mind-consciousness elements without root-cause (40), (41), (56), and it [does so] twice or once, following after the impulsions that have impelled, and with respect to an object other than the life-continuum's object, like some of the water that follows a little after a boat going upstream. Though ready to occur with the life-continuum's object after the impulsions have ended, it nevertheless occurs making the impulsions' object its object. Because of that it is called 'registration' (tadaaramma.na--lit. 'having-that-as-its-object'). This is how the occurrence of eleven kinds of resultant consciousness should be understood as registration. N: Retention seizes the object of the javana-cittas. Therefore it is called: having that object, tadaaramma.na ( is that, is object). These eleven kinds of vipaakacittas which are retention are: eight mahaa-vipaakacittas (with sobhana hetus, beautiful roots); three ahetuka vipaakacittas which are three resultant mind-consciousness elements without root-cause. These are the same types as the three santiira.nacittas (investigating consciousness ) which, in this case, perform the function of retention. One is kusala vipaakacitta accompanied by pleasant feeling (if the object is very desirable), one is kusala vipaakacitta accompanied by indifferent feeling and one is akusala vipaakacitta (if the object is undesirable) accompanied by indifferent feeling. The many intricate conditions for retention that arises in between the javana-cittas and the bhavanga-citta remind us that cittas operate each because of their own conditions, nobody can direct them to be in this or that way. As we read in the Co. to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha (T.A., p. 129): <...thus one should understand that when consciousness is operating, it operates by virtue of the fixed order of consciousness (citta niyama), like the fixed order of the seasons and seeds, without there being anyone issuing orders saying,¹You are adverting and come immediately after existence-continuum (bhavanga-citta); you are, say, seeing, or whatever, and come immediately after adverting.¹> ***** Nina. 39647 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 11:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Dear friend James, op 10-12-2004 09:35 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@y...: For example, I > can use the word `control' and mean a type of control in a > conventional sense that is not absolute, while others see the > word `control' and immediately start thinking, "ATTA BELIEF! N: No. No. Also Howard explained how he uses the word control (many, many times!!), and I am not afraid of the word control. Meanwhile, I saw your other letter, this overlaps now. Howard explained what I mean when speaking of self etc. (He rescued me before in a similar case with someone else ;-)) ) > James: I was aware of the content of Nina's sentence. I genuinely want to know > why she believes this. However, I think I am getting on her nerves > with this method of inquiry so it may end soon! ;-)) N: to be straightforward, I think the following: we may understand correctly in theory that there can be control and no self doing it, but, inspite of this, the latent tendency conditions time and again wrong view, a dhamma that is wrong belief in self doing this or that. That is why I am grateful that Kh. Sujin says: *the self* is coming in again. But, we may not like to admit this. It can be very, very subtle, hardly noticeable. Before we know we are deluded. James, you are a very understanding person and you do not get on my nerves. I do not mind explaining something again and again, because I know that these are very subtle points and hard to get. But like Howard, I get sometimes weary of too many debates about the same matters. I am not alluding to you now, I mean in general. You have a keen mind and get things quickly. Lodewijk said: these are intelligent questions. When you read Kh. Sujin's sayings, often repeated here, it gives me pleasure to explain more. I do not have the feeling that I should defend anything, I find it a good check for myself whether I have really understood what I repeat. Thus, no need to go around it like Socrates, you can ask straight without much ado. Unlike you I think seeing is an important subject. When we understand what it is it helps to understand other dhammas and how they function. The suttas are full of it. J: The Buddha said that we can > determine that the five khandas are not `self' because we cannot > say, "Let them be thus'. So, to my way of thinking, a belief in > self means that one believes they have absolute control over the > five khandas. I don't believe that, and yet I still believe in the > value of guarding the senses and directing the senses. N: We agree here completely :-) I am glad you have confidence in his teaching. I am also impressed by the sutta text that the Buddha said, it can be done. I begin my India talk like this and Lodewijk added some words: ³Abandon evil, O monks! One can abandon evil, O monks!If it were impossible to abandon evil, I would not ask you to do so. But as it can be done, therefore I say ŒAbandon evil!¹ If this abandoning of evil would bring harm and suffering, I would not ask you to abandon it. But as the abandoning of evil brings weal and happiness, therefore I say, Œabandon evil!¹ Cultivate the good, O monks! One can cultivate what is good, O monks. If it were impossible to cultivate the good, I would not ask you to do so. But as it can be done, therefore I say, ŒCultivate the good!¹ If this cultivation of the good would bring harm and suffering, I would not ask you to cultivate it. But as the cultivation of the good brings weal and happiness, therefore I say, ŒCultivate the good!¹ ² (Gradual Sayings Book of the twos, II, 9, translated by Ven. Nyanaponika, Wheel 155-158.) Lodewijk: These compassionate words of the Buddha show that also in his lifetime people must have struggled with the depth and complexity of his teachings and had to be encouraged on the right path. How much more so in our days! During one of our long and strenuous bus rides through India Lodewijk recited this sutta to our friends. Nina. P.S. I like to correspond with you, but I may not always answer immediately because of lack of time. I read your apologies, but really no need for that. Again, you are not burdening me. 39648 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 11:47am Subject: Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations Hi Howard, op 10-12-2004 05:52 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > Just another thought or two about anatta, anicca, and about relations. > As I think about these a bit more, I do think it may not be wrong to > think of them as realities. N: I promised a text: Vis. XXI, note 4 (p. 747, the whole page is good): When we read such a text we should not understand it in a theoretical or abstract way. As you also indicated, we should not see them as anatta in general, etc., thus, in an abstract way. They are bound up and inherent in all conditioned dhammas. Take seeing now, it has the true nature of impermanence. It falls away, no matter someone realizes this or not. It is an element, beyond control, non-self, no matter one realizes this or not. When insight is developed it can be known without words, insight knows directly without thinking that seeing is non-self, that it is seeing that sees, not a person. As Larry said, insight knows, sati does its task (or something like that). We can talk about dhammas as elements, and that means already: devoid of self. I think there is no need to ask ourselves: is this concept or reality? Then there is doubt, not understanding. H: I think that they are mind-door realities. N: Also in a sense-door process the kusala cittas can be accompanied by pañña. The processes follow upon each other very fast. When pañña realizes seeing as anatta, nobody can stop the occurring of a following eye-door process process with kusala cittas accompanied by pañña. Nina. 39649 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 11:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 133 ), lokuttara citta and dukkha. Dear Sarah and Htoo, recently Ken O explained it very clearly. We have to know whether the context is: dukkha as one of the noble Truths or dukkha lakkha.na. All cittas are impermanent and thus dukkha. But the noble truth of dukkha does not apply to lokuttara citta, it does not have as origin the second noble truth: clinging. op 10-12-2004 10:11 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...: > You said, I believe, that the lokuttara cittas are not included in dukkha > in the 4 Noble Truths. I heard K.Sujin explain the same, saying this was > because these cittas couldn't be known prior to being experienced or sth > along those lines. 39650 From: Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 7:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations In a message dated 12/10/2004 5:06:56 AM Pacific Standard Time, jwromeijn@y... writes: One concrete question: Can one just say 'concept' as abstraction; or had one always to say the 'concept of person x' ? Does a concept exist outside the mind of a person, as such ? I think the answer is no; I think a concept nearly the same as a theory. Metta Joop Hi Joop Based on the above analysis, consciousness would also be an abstraction or theory because it does not exist outside the mind. TG 39651 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 0:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 69- Perception/Sa~n~naa (p) Hello Phil, In different contexts saññaa can have different meanings. Take: the idea of impermanence, here saññaa is the equivalent of insight, insight into impermanence. I learnt this from the Co to the Mahaaraahulovaadasutta. And recently: it can stand even for citta: the beings of the fourth arupa brahma world are: neva-saññi-naasaññino: having neither consciousness nor non-consciousness. Idea is not a fortunate translation of sañña. You have to remember again and again with kusala citta and paññaa that condiitoned realities are impermanent. I have to look at the Co for details. Nina. op 10-12-2004 13:03 schreef plnao op plnao@j...:> >> We read in the Gradual Sayings (Book of the >> Tens, Chapter VI, §6, Ideas) about ten kinds of saññå ... >> -The idea of the foul, of death, ... 39652 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 1:52pm Subject: Hinayana and Theravada Hello all, On multi-tradition lists, one constantly comes across the label 'hinayana' applied to Theravada. It is a repetitive topic, the term is often used in a perjorative way, and often generates a good deal of heat. Just in case any new members have come across this term and find it confusing, these articles may be of assistance. The Myth of Hinayana, Article: Theravada is NOT Hinayana http://www.lienet.no/hinayan1.htm The Bodhisattva Ideal in Theravada http://www.buddhistinformation.com/bodhisattva_ideal_in_theravada.htm Hinayana - The "N-word" of Buddhism http://ozarkzen.org/mahathera.html metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 39653 From: Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 5:19pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations Joop: "One concrete question: Can one just say 'concept' as abstraction; or had one always to say the 'concept of person x' ? Does a concept exist outside the mind of a person, as such ? I think the answer is no; I think a concept nearly the same as a theory." Hi Joop, A concept manifests only as an object of consciousness and its cetasikas. A formation, on the other hand, can arise outside of consciousness, e.g. rupa always manifests as a compound of the primary elements and arises outside of consciousness, thence contact. A relation could be either concept or formation. Cetasikas that arise with consciousness do not necessarily become objects of consciousness. Consciousness can have only one object. So cetasikas, rupas, and formations can arise outside of consciousness, that is, not its object. Concept can only "be" object of consciousness. One can, and often does, speak almost completely abstractly without reference to specific experience. Like this email (oops, an experience). Concept is name and/or meaning. There are nameless (wordless) concepts but I don't think there are names (words) without meaning. "Meaning" has a very rich and varied meaning. A theory could easily be view (ditthi). I understand view to be a concept one clings to. In this area it is often difficult to distinguish concept from reality, but the clinging is pretty obvious, though sometimes not so obvious. I really believe I am real. Don't you? Larry 39654 From: Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 5:39pm Subject: Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations Hi Nina, This is not to say that concepts cannot be (mis)apprehended as impermanent. Nations, chariots, and persons are often so (mis)apprehended. Larry 39655 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 7:49 pm Subject: Re: Vis. XIV, 122 and Tiika Friend Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina wrote: > Vis. XIV, 122 and Tiika > It is said that kamma does not produce retention that is more outstanding > (more superior, ukka.t.thara) than itself. Mahaa-kusala citta with two > roots, for example, does not produce retention with three roots. (See > Expositor, p. 356, which gives opinions of different teachers.) Could you explain more what this means? What are the root causes and how are they influenced by kamma? Metta, James 39656 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 8:37pm Subject: Re: kusala and akusala. Friend Nina, Thank you for your kind response and patience with my questions. I apologize for the Socratic Method I was using but I have tried to be straightforward with you in the past and I didn't understand the answers you gave me. I didn't understand the reason behind the answer, but I think I understand a lot more now. I want to respond to just one point you make, which I believe is very important: Nina: to be straightforward, I think the following: we may understand correctly in theory that there can be control and no self doing it, but, inspite of this, the latent tendency conditions time and again wrong view, a dhamma that is wrong belief in self doing this or that. That is why I am grateful that Kh. Sujin says: *the self* is coming in again. But, we may not like to admit this. It can be very, very subtle, hardly noticeable. Before we know we are deluded. James: I can understand why Kh. Sujin believes that this approach is necessary because there are many people who are highly deluded. Since I helped with meditation retreats, I met many people like this. One example that stands out in my mind was a man who wanted to meditate practically all the time. He once had to wait at an office building for something and decided to do walking meditation in the parking lot while he was waiting. After a while, a small crowd formed and the building security was called to go out and confront him. He was scaring a lot of people! LOL! That type of behavior is just crazy in my opinion and does, at a subtle level, reveal a person who believes in a "self" who is able to control things. The sad part is that he didn't see anything wrong with his behavior; he thought that the building security was at fault. He thought that if the building security and the onlookers were as `wise as him', they would appreciate what he was doing and not bother him. Crazy, crazy! However, and I mean this kindly, Kh. Sujin may be committing what is called `wrong dhamma' and a `danger to the dhamma'. To quote Ledi Sayadaw in "Bodhipakkhiya Dipani": "This is so because these are times when miccha-dhamma (wrong Dhamma) that are likely to cause dhammantaraya (danger to the Dhamma) are rife. By miccha-dhamma that are likely to cause dhammantaraya is meant such views, practices and limitations as the inability to see the dangers of samsára, the belief that these are times when the Paths and the Fruits can no longer be attained, the tendency to defer effort until the parami ripen, the belief that persons of the present day are dvi-hetuka,[38] the belief that the great teachers of the past were nonexistent, etc. 38. Dvi-hetuka-patisandhi--Being reborn with only two root- conditions: alobha (detachment) and adosa (amity). Dvi-hetuka-patisandhi individuals cannot attain the Paths and the Fruits in the present life. 39. Ti-hetuka-patisandhi--Being reborn with all the three root- conditions, namely, alobha, adosa and amoha (wisdom)." It seems that Kh. Sujin is operating under a slight variation of the belief that people of the present day are dvi-hetuka: that the people of today don't have enough inherent wisdom to attain the paths and the fruits of practice. Therefore, it seems that she stresses that people should only study the Abhidhamma so that they may have this wisdom in future lives. This is probably another reason why she stresses the idea that one cannot obtain enlightenment in this lifetime; that enlightenment will take several lives. Personally, I find this a dangerous thing to be teaching. I know that Kh. Sujin may have the best intentions but the negative karma for teaching something contrary to the dhamma is very great. Like those who split the sangha, it could result in an immediate rebirth in hell. Metta, James 39657 From: Ken O Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 11:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi Friend James 39. Ti-hetuka-patisandhi--Being reborn with all the three root- conditions, namely, alobha, adosa and amoha (wisdom)." k: Personally when one have faith in the Dhamma is with a conviction, this conviction cannot arise without panna. When one believe in the insight vehicle, the way of development cannot happen without panna, hence the practise of the insight vehicle is with the initial basis that arise with tri-hetuka-patisandhi or not one will not have conviction with the dhamma. The faith on the insight path is difficult to believe especially when the only way out is wise attention takes a lot of faith and conviction especially in times of this century where concentration is emphasis as the vehicle to practise by many comtemporary dhamma practitioners. This do not mean they do not have tri-hetuka patisandhi because if they dont have such, they would not have believe in Buddhism in the first place. Tri-hetuka patisandhi does not implied during a Buddha sasana, it can also happen to people who practise it even when Buddha dhamma is no longer around. Many examples were seen during Buddha Bodhisattva times. Ken O 39658 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 2:40am Subject: The Buddha In His First Week Dear Dhamma Friends, As soon as asavakkhaya nana arose, all other Buddhaly nanas also arose in Him and He stayed in the greatest bliss. The Buddha sat at the foot of the Bo tree for the whole week. This is the first week. It is called 'pathama sattaaha' or the first week. The Buddha stayed there near the Bo tree for 49 successive days and all these 49 days are known as 'satta-sattaaha' or '7 of 7-days- staying. In the first week The Buddha reviewed on what He discovered. When He first obtained the divinely nana called 'pubbenivasa nana' or 'recollection of all past lives limitlessly', He did contemplated on Dhamma. But in His first week of Buddhahood, this contemplation is much much more effective and He saw everything very very clearly and unobstructively because now He was totally free of any defilements in any form including anusaya forms or subtle forms. The Buddha had been sitting at the foot of the Bo tree on the grass- seat called 'Bodhi-Pallinka'. He was sitting contemplating on Dhamma. He was reviewing self-less nature of Dhamma through paticca-samuppada. He contemplated in foreward order and then backward order and again He contemplated on Dhamma through paticca-samuppada in both foreward and backward order. Before His Buddhahood, dhammas happened in such a foreward order. Avijja or ignorance leads to sankhara or formation or fabrication. Sankhara leads to vinnana or consciousness. Vinnana leads to nama- rupa or mind-material. Nama-rupa leads to salayatana or 6-sense-base. Salayatana leads to phassa or contact. Phassa leads to vedana or feeling. Vedana leads to tanha or craving. Tanha leads to upadana or clinging. Upadana leads to bhavo or becoming. Bhava leads to jati or rebirth. Jati leads to jara/marana and all other stressful conditions and sufferings of living. There is no self at all. May you be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 39659 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 2:56am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 168 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, We have discussed dhammas down to atomic level and molecular level. All 89 cittas or all 121 cittas have been well explained. Now we are reproaching again the different classifications of citta. Cittas with different vedana or feeling have been discussed. Another classification is cittas with different hetu or root conditions. We have talked on 18 ahetuka cittas. There are 71 sahetuka cittas or 71 cittas with root dhammas. (18 + 71 = 89 cittas). Among 71 sahetuka cittas or consciousness with root, 2 cittas have only one root. That root is moha hetu. These 2 cittas are moha mula cittas or moha-rooted consciousness. They are 'upekkha saha gatam vicikiccha sampayutta citta' and 'upekkha saha gatam uddhacca sampayutta citta'. Molecular level of these 2 cittas have been discussed. Akusala dhammas never arise with kusala dhammas. This is the rule of citta niyama. Akusala hetus or roots never arise with kusala hetus or roots. So in 2 moha cittas, alobha, adosa, and amoha do not arise. In these 2 moha mula cittas, there is no lobha and no dosa. So there is only one and a single hetu which is moha cetasika. So these 2 cittas are called ekahetuka cittas or single-rooted consciousness. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39660 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 3:20am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 169 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, We have discussed dhammas down to atomic level and molecular level. All 89 cittas or all 121 cittas have been well explained. Now we are reproaching again the different classifications of citta. Cittas with different vedana or feeling have been discussed. In another classification of citta, we are discussing on cittas with different root dhammas. 18 ahetuka cittas and 2 ekahetuka cittas have been discussed. There are 22 dvihetuka cittas or 22 double-rooted consciousness. They are 3 sets of dhamma namely lobha cittas, dosa cittas and kusala cittas. 1. 8 Llobha mula cittas 2. 2 dosa mula cittas 3.12 nana vipayutta mahakusala cittas ---------- 22 dvihetuka cittas or 22 double-rooted consciousness There are 8 lobha mula cittas. To list again, they are 1.somanassa saha gatam ditthi gata sampayuttam asankharika citta 2.somanassa saha gatam ditthi gata sampayuttam sasankharika citta 3.somanassa saha gatam ditthi gata vippayuttam asankharika citta 4.somanassa saha gatam ditthi gata vippayuttam sasankharika citta 5. upekkha saha gatam ditthi gata sampayuttam asankharika citta 6. upekkha saha gatam ditthi gata sampayuttam sasankharika citta 7. upekkha saha gatam ditthi gata vippayuttam asankharika citta 8. upekkha saha gatam ditthi gata vippayuttam sasankharika citta Somanassa is piti and it is mental joy. So 4 cittas are with piti and so they are with somanassa vedana or mental pleasure. And later 4 cittas are upekkha cittas and they do not have piti and their vedana is indifferent feeling. Lobha citta is just one but as vedana differs there are 2 cittas; somanassa or upekkha. Ditthi is a cetasika and it is wrong view. There are 4 cittas with ditthi and they are labelled as 'ditthi gata sampayutta'. Gata means 'to go' and sampayutta means 'mixed inseparably'. As 4 cittas are with ditthi, other 4 cittas are without ditthi or wrong view. First lobha citta is one but because of vedana there are 2. These 2 cittas have different status when they are accompanied by ditthi or not. So 2 and 2 makes 4 cittas. Again asankharika means 'unpromptedness' and sasankharika means 'with prompt'. Already existed 4 different cittas are multiplied with 2 and so there are 8 total lobha mula cittas. 4 cittas are somanassa and 4 cittas are upekkha. 4 cittas are ditthi cittas and 4 cittas are without ditthi. 4 cittas are asankharika cittas and 4 cittas are sasankharika cittas. All these 8 lobha mula cittas have been discussed at molecular level. As they are lobha mula cittas, there always arise lobha cetasika and this cetasika serves as lobha root or lobha hetu. As these 8 cittas are akusala cittas, they are always led by moha cetasika. Moha also serves as a root and it is moha hetu or moha root. So in all these 8 lobha mula cittas, root dhammas are moha and lobha. Dosa never arise together with lobha in the same moment and in the same citta. As these 8 cittas are akusala cittas, there is no hetu of kusala origin. So there are only 2 roots in these 8 lobha mula cittas and they are moha nad lobha. So 8 lobha mula cittas are dvihetuka cittas or double-rooted consciousness. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39661 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 3:31am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 170 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, The first classification of citta we have discussed is vedana classification. They are 62 somanassa cittas, 1 sukha citta, 1 dukkha citta, 2 domanassa cittas and 55 upekkha cittas. The second classification of citta we are discussing is hetu classification. There are 18 ahetuka cittas, 2 ekahetuka citta, 22 dvihetuka cittas and 47 tihetuka cittas. We have discussed on 18 ahetuka cittas and 2 ekahetuka cittas. There are 22 dvihetuka cittas or 22 double-rooted consciousness. They are 8 lobha mula cittas, 2 dosa mula cittas and 12 nana vipppayutta cittas. Lobha cittas have been explained in the previous post. There are 2 dosa mula cittas. 1. domanassa saha gatam patigha sampayuttam asankharika citta 2. domanassa saha gatam patigha sampayuttam sasankharika citta Dosa citta or hating mind always hurts. So both of these 2 dosa mula cittas are associated with hurting or patigha. Domanassa is mental displeasure. There is no joy at all when dosa citta arises. Vedana is domanassa vedana. And patigha always happens. One citta does not need promptedness and the other needs it. In these 2 dosa mula cittas, there are moha and dosa as root dhamma. So they are also dvihetuka cittas or double-rooted consciousness. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39662 From: plnao Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 3:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: AN III - 100 mental misconduct vs. thoughts of ill-will Hi Jon, and all A long ramble follows. Please read at your leisure, if you care to. I've let this one sit for awhile, Jon. I like your pace of exchanging messages. Nice and easy - no need to rush. My views on the topics to follow are still so formative that ....well, it helps to write them out now and then even though they are formative. > Phil : Needless to say, like all beginners, I see the exhortative, prescriptive > sounding language used in the suttas (in translation, at the very least, > and presumedly in the original as well) and take it as written. You're > right though, it is so much better to see them as descriptive. So, when we > read, for example, that one removes an unwholesome thought and replaces it > with a wholesome one the way a carpenter replaces a rotten peg with a > solid one, it is a description of what happens when panna rules rather > than a prescription of what someone should do. > > Jon: > A topic well worth discussing, but I find it helps to have the particular > wording to hand. Since I couldn't readily find the peg passage you refer > to, I have given below the statement of the 4 padhanas from Nyanatiloka's > 'Buddhist Dictionary' under the entry 'padhana', a passage that comes up > frequently in this context. You know, at my level of insight, it's really only rote learning to say "panna" controls the citta, but even at the level of rote learning (or "parroting" as people insist on saying - I think this term is disrespectful to Dhamma, because rote is part and parcel of bhavana in Asia, at least) it is helpful. Slowly, the message sinks in, the truth sinks in. Spend some time in the khandas vagga of SN, soak in it, reflect on it, and the belief that there is a self that can control the development of kusala wears away. Yes, I have experienced the benefits of direct action against certain defilements, but even a person of my basic insight can see that it is foolish to think that I am doing anything. It shows ignorance of conditions. So I say "panna" is directing the citta, for want of a better way to get at the way conditions pley out. > As we know, the Buddha's whole teaching can be characterised by the > general pattern 'when this occurs, that comes to be; when this is absent, > that does not come to be', and I think these passages can be seen in the > same (i.e., non-prescriptive) vein. I have come to agree. The right effort language gave me pause, with its exertion and striving and what not. But there is not reason that we cannot be compelled to act in a seemingly intentional way by conditions. Take natural decisive support condition. If I bear down intentionally on a troublesome fabrication, it is because there is a condition for it. It could be as simple as having success with a similar effort the previous day - or previous moment. But it is still a condition. We are not doing it. That seems pretty clear to me, and I have only begun to understand conditions.. Still, knowing this doesn't prevent me from *not* being content with rare moments of mindfulness. The other day Rob K was wondering why people can't be content with this. I think it's fear. Last night in bed, when I was having trouble sleeping, I read some of the talk with Bhikkhu Dhammadharo, who might have the strictest insistence of the rarity of sati, of the rarity of kusala, of the need for great patience of anyone I've come across, including K Sujin, or Nina, or Rob K, or you, or others. He, of course, famously said "one moment of sati in one lifetime? Wealthy man!" or words to that effect. In the middle of the night, when one can't sleep, and reads his talk, there is resistance, there is fear. We want more reassurance, but we don't find it there. Bhante V talked of pessimism - I don't think it is pessimism, it is the perfection of truth, of facing the power of conditions, of kamma. There can be optimism, because we can have our vision cleared and see into the moment. But instead we have fear and rush out for disguised forms of salvation bordering on eternalism. The insistence in the West on nibbana in this lifetime. "It happens in suttas" people say, and it does, but as far as I know it doesn't happen very often to monks who ask for it, who demand it. They are caught by surprise. Surprised by nibanna, to paraphrase CS Lewis. ("Surprised by Joy" was the tititle of his auto-biogrpahy of conversion.) Is that as prevalent in Asian Theravada? Somehow, I doubt it. There is more appreciation of the value of patience in Asia. I think it is a fear of death, a fear of extinction that lies behind some (not everyone's) determined pursuit of nibbana in this lifetime. Why is it not a great enough goal to eliminate wrong view of self, to aspire to sotapanna? When the next lifetime's rebirth has in all likelihood already been determined by kamma, why this determination to have nibbana in this lifetime? I think it is fear of letting go of control, fear of death. I always am so inspired when Nina is so constant, so undoubting about the importance of present realities. When I am her age, will I be so courageous, or will I waver and hedge my bets and grasp at comforting views that conceal a subtle clinging to eternalsm? (I know, 75 is not so old...) This is one of my rambles, obviously. > It is also worth noting (since we share a background in ESL ;-)), that > this and most of the other references one seems to come across are in the > third person ('a monk does this and that'), rather than in second person > which we would more normally associate with prescriptive language. Very good point. I'd never thought of that. The 3rd person is much more descriptive. I would have to check this, but I think even when the Buddha is talking to a monk, he uses the 3rd person to describe what is entailed. I think that is a very important point. > > Did the Buddha tell people to have more kusala, or did he rather help them > to see the value of having more kusala, and point out the different kinds > of kusala to be developed and their relative merits? To me, the former > would suggest that kusala could be made to arise by following a certain > set of procedures with the right kind of intention, which is definitely > not the flavour of the dhamma overall, as I see it. Well, he certainly did give some very harsh warnings about the danger of akusala, of the "If I were to die tonight" variety that warn of unfavourable rebirth. And he did use language that he surely knew would be interpreted as being prescriptive. And he is compared to a doctor at times, a doctor prescribing medicine. So the prescriptive aspect is there, defintely. And again, I think it is very helfpul for people who are at a more basic stage of insight. I am sure I will continue to benefit from seeing a precriptive aspect to the Buddha's teaching as I continue to work on some very blatant, very defineable defilements. Someone, I forget who, said that he (I assume) said that he thought K Sujin's teaching was suitable only for people who have already become enlightened. I can see why he thought so - it is a very pure, very deep, very true Dhamma that cannot be fully appreciated by beginners, especially in the West, where results are wanted fast. I have been wondering aloud here about the possible conflict between emotional well-being in this lifetime and the development of insight. If people need an emotional fix, they will not find it in Abhidhamma, not usually. (I did, for some reason.) People want to control things - subtly and not so subtly, they insist on it. They do not like to be under the control of conditions. But surely this is the case - even when I decide to stop watching TV news and forcefully do so. That resolution was anatta, a conditioned nama. > Phil: > For example, we talk of guarding sense doors, and it's easy to think of > this as a prescribed practice, but whenever there is kusala citta, the > sense doors *are* guarded, because there can only be congnition through > one sense door at a time. > > Jon: > Absolutely so. See the reference to guarded sense doors in the first of > the 4 right efforts: > (1) "What now, o monks, is the effort to avoid? Perceiving a form, or a > sound, or an odour, or a taste, or a bodily or mental impression, the monk > neither adheres to the whole nor to its parts. And he strives to ward off > that through which evil and unwholesome things might arise, such as greed > and sorrow, if he remained with unguarded senses; and he watches over his > senses, restrains his senses. This is called the effort to avoid. > > It's interesting to note that the primary meaning of the effort to avoid > (i.e., the first of the 2 parts to it) is given in these terms: > "Perceiving a form, or a sound, or an odour, or a taste, or a bodily or > mental impression, the monk neither adheres to the whole nor to its > parts." > > There is nothing prescriptive about this, surely. Of course, if we read > it as referring to something to be done (in the sense of a technique or > practice of some kind), then we might assume that we are being told/urged > to do it. But I think the stage of 'not adhering to the whole nor [the] > parts' of arising sense door objects refers to the presence of a > relatively high level of awareness and understanding and is not something > that can somehow be 'practised'. Phil: Yes, but when we get to the second right effort, the language sounds much more forceful - "destroys them, dispels them" etc. And it can be done in a forceful way - we see that in the sutta about removing distracting thoughts. And it's easy to see why people fall into the error of thinking it is something that can be done intentionally. It will not happen until wisdom arises and directs it, it will not happen unless there are conditions that give rise to it. No need for pessimism there, because this wisdom cannot be developed even in this lifetime. It only took me 44 years to figure out how harmful the TV news is for me! Wisdom would have been appreciated a little sooner, but there is no controlling wisdom. > So this level of sati and panna would I believe be what is meant by > remaining with unguarded senses in the second part of the definition. > > Phil, much more that could be discussed in your post, particularly the > 'active' language issue (which I see as being different to the > 'prescriptive' language issue), but this is already long enough. Hoping > that this helps you feel more comfortable with a non-prescriptive > interpretation of this particular passage. Thanks Jon. As you can see, I am more comfortable with a non-prescriptive interpretation of this. I think that wee-hours session with Bhikkhu Dhammadharo was very good for me. I felt fear, the unwillingness to let go of control. But that seemed to be a condition for being able to let go a bit more. A gradual process. Metta, Phil > > Jon > > From Nyanatiloka's 'Buddhist Dictionary', 'padhaana': > > "The monk rouses his will to avoid the arising of evil, unwholesome things > not yet arisen ... to overcome them ... to develop wholesome things not > yet arisen ... to maintain them, and not to let them disappear, but to > bring them to growth, to maturity and to the full perfection of > development. And he makes effort, stirs up his energy, exerts his mind and > strives" (A. IV, 13). > > (1) "What now, o monks, is the effort to avoid? Perceiving a form, or a > sound, or an odour, or a taste, or a bodily or mental impression, the monk > neither adheres to the whole nor to its parts. And he strives to ward off > that through which evil and unwholesome things might arise, such as greed > and sorrow, if he remained with unguarded senses; and he watches over his > senses, restrains his senses. This is called the effort to avoid. > > (2) "What now is the effort to overcome? The monk does not retain any > thought of sensual lust, or any other evil, unwholesome states that may > have arisen; he abandons them, dispels them, destroys them, causes them to > disappear. This is called the effort to overcome. > > (3) "What now is the effort to develop? The monk develops the factors of > enlightenment, bent on solitude, on detachment, on extinction, and ending > in deliverance, namely: mindfulness (sati), investigation of the law > (dhamma-vicaya), energy (viriya), rapture (píti), tranquillity > (passaddhi), concentraton (samádhi), equanimity (upekkhá). This is called > the effort to develop. > > (4) "What now is the effort to maintain? The monk keeps firmly in his mind > a favourable object of concentration, such as the mental image of a > skeleton, a corpse infested by worms, a corpse blueblack in colour, a > festering corpse, a corpse riddled with holes, a corpse swollen up. This > is called the effort to maintain" (A. IV, 14). > 39663 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 3:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 166 ) Dear Phil, Somanassa or somanassa vedana arises with piti cetasika. Somanassa santirana does have piti and somanassa. It has to arise because of conditions. No dhamma arises without cause and condition. This citta 'somanassa santirana citta' cannot perform patisandhi function or linking function. Nor do bhavanga function and cuti function. It just does 2 functions. One function is santirana or investigating function. Another function is tadarammana function or retention function. When javana cittas are all somanassa, then tadarammana cittas have to be somanassa. If santirana cittas have to arise as tadarammana cittas, then they will be somanassa santirana in this case. With Metta, Htoo Naing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "plnao" wrote: > Hello Htoo > > > And there is an extra santirana citta. It is somanassa santirana > > citta. > (snip) > > joyous-investigating-consciousness and indifferent-investigating- > > consciousness all of which are the result of past good kamma or > > wholesome actions in the past. > > I forget why there is the extra joyous-investigating-consciousness. > I could go and check ADL but I will ask you if you don't mind. > > From the name, I would guess that the object causes joy - so maybe it > is some very special object. Now I remember something about > Buddha statues, for example. > > But I have also read somewhere that there is nothing intrinsic in > objects that make them wholesome or unwholesome - it all depends on our > attention, > whether it is yoniso manasikara or ayoniso manasikara. Otherwise > objects have no intrinsic wholesomeness or unwholesomeness. > > Thanks in advance for your feedback. > > Metta, > Phil 39664 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 4:11am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 70- Perception/Sa~n~naa (q) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.3 Perception(sa~n~naa)contd] ***** Questions i Saññå accompanies each citta, but it falls away completely with the citta. How can we still remember things which happened in the past? ii When we see a house, through which doorway does saññå perform its function? iii When we mistake something for something else, how can there still be saññå at such a moment? iv When we recognize a house, can there be perversion of saññå? v Can the sotåpanna think of concepts and recognize people and things? vi Give examples of akusala saññå. vii How can one develop ‘perception of impermanence’ (anicca saññå)? ***** [Ch.3 Perception(sa~n~naa)finished!] Metta, Sarah ====== 39665 From: Egbert Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 4:16am Subject: Re: Prolific Posters Hi Christine and everyone, I was just contemplating the same subject. Of course, and not intended as a correction of your post, there is the number 0, which is quite a Buddhist number. As a representation of the unrepresentable, it is perhaps the "original sin". And now I've gone and blotted my copybook :-) Have enjoyed lurking, though Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > > Hello all, > > For interests sake, I thought I'd see just who our most prolific > members are. There are approximately 31 members who have sent in > posts to the List from the 1st December, up to this moment, and my > estimate (allowing for different time zones and any miscounting) is: > Upasaka Howard 83 Nina 55 KenO 52 Hugo 39 Phil 37 RobM 36 > Htoo 35 Sarah 33 Larry 31 Mike 29 James 24 Andrew 22 Bhante > Vimalaramsi 18 > > Obviously at only 7, I'm letting the side down quite badly. :-) > > metta and peace, > Christine > ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 39666 From: plnao Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 5:26am Subject: quiz answers- Phil (was Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 70- Perception/Sa~n~naa (q)) Hello all > i Saññå accompanies each citta, but it falls away completely > with the citta. How can we still remember things which > happened in the past? Sanna accompanies every citta, and marks it, so that is how we can recognize it or remember it. Sanna marks an object so that it can be recognized again. I think this is the correct answer, but I don't really get it, yet, to tell the truth. What does it mean to say that sanna "marks" an object? I know the metaphor of the carpenter marking the wood. That I can understand. But how sanna marks an object. Not yet. No hurry though. I'm sure I am still thinking in conventional terms, of a memory needing to be stored. I don't think the neurology of memories and Abhidhamma's interpretation of remembering need to fit perfectly. The purpose of Abhidhamma is to help us toward detachment, not to describe the working of the brain. That's for science. Science and Dhamma can part ways. Should part ways. That's my opinion. Detachment is not a science. > ii When we see a house, through which doorway does saññå > perform its function? When we see a "house", rather than a visible object, there is a concept, not a reality. So I guess the mind door? Quote: "When we understand the meaning of what has been said there are cittas which experience concepts and the sanna which accompanies those cittas remembers and "marks" a concept. So I guess the same applies for "when we understand the meaning of what hsa been seen." > iii When we mistake something for something else, how can > there still be saññå at such a moment? I look out the window and see a huge full moon in the sky. There is a concept. Sanna marks it. Then I realize it is a lightbulb hanging from the balcony roof. Sanna marks it. When we are mistaking something for something, we are dealing with two concepts, aren't we? So in a sense, neither are the realities of visible object, colour etc. Sanna marks both the concepts. It doesn't matter which one is really the moon, and which is the lightbulb. They're both concepts. Just taking a wild shot here. > > iv When we recognize a house, can there be perversion of > saññå? If we think it is something that will last, is permanent, there is a perversion of perception. Just as if we see something foul (human body) and believe it to be fair. That sounds a bit harsh, but it is the Buddha's teaching that the body is foul. Hard to get over, that. Today I was teaching a student who was wearing a red, low cut sweater. Her skin was so smooth, so glowing. A pendant hung enticingly at the top of her cleavage. The pendant said "come, reflect on my beauty, and that of those that lie just below." I reflected instead on the foulness of the body to keep my mind from "going there" any further. It was quite effective. It helped me to connect with her in a more wholesome way, a more helpful way for both of us. > v Can the sotåpanna think of concepts and recognize people > and things? Sure. He or she still has lobha, a lot of lobha, so can mistake that which is foul for that which is fair. The sotapanna is rid of doubt, and self-view, and he can no longer have lobha or dosa of a strength that could cause a transgression, but there is still clinging. > > vi Give examples of akusala saññå. "To hold that in dukka there is non-dukkha" Let's say I go to a baseball game and drink lots of beer. Sanna does not mark the beer correctly, so there is not the correct perception of dukkha. > vii How can one develop 'perception of impermanence' (anicca > saññå)? Patience. Cultivating panna. Knowing realities as they appear through the six doors. Metta, Phil p.s Nina, I know you're busy. Please don't feel the need to answer here, unless you'd like to. There's no hurry. 39667 From: plnao Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 5:56am Subject: typo Re: [dsg] Re: AN III - 100 mental misconduct vs. thoughts of ill-will . > It will not happen until wisdom arises and directs it, it > will not > happen unless there are conditions that give rise to it. No need for > pessimism > there, because this wisdom cannot be developed even in this lifetime. It *can* be developed in this lifetime, of course. The Buddha said so. "If it wasn't possible, I wouldn't tell you to do it" or words to that effect. That was a typo. Metta, Phil 39668 From: agriosinski Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 7:12am Subject: Re: The Buddha In His First Week > Avijja or ignorance leads to sankhara or formation or fabrication. > Sankhara leads to vinnana or consciousness. Vinnana leads to nama- > rupa or mind-material. Nama-rupa leads to salayatana or 6-sense-base. > Salayatana leads to phassa or contact. > > Phassa leads to vedana or feeling. Vedana leads to tanha or craving. > Tanha leads to upadana or clinging. Upadana leads to bhavo or > becoming. Bhava leads to jati or rebirth. Jati leads to jara/marana > and all other stressful conditions and sufferings of living. There is > no self at all. Dear Htoo, Could I have your detailed explanation, in depth picture of what avija comes to be and how it leads, what exactly happens that sankharas arise. And then what sankhara is and how it leads to vinnana etc. etc. Or if you don't feel like writing about it, could you point me to the other source? respectfully, Agrios. 39669 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 7:22am Subject: Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... Hi Howard (and Sarah) Butting in if I may. This is not so much a response to your points directly, Howard, as putting up some other ideas up for consideration or comment, based on my reading of the texts. As a beginner I always like to go back to basics ;-)), so I'll start with a definition of 'dhamma'. 1. 'Dhammas' as 'realities' The term 'dhammas' has many meanings, but in this context (i.e., as the object of insight development) it means things that 'bear their own characteristic'. Visible object and sound, when experienced, have the same characteristic/s for all beings at all times, and in this sense they are 'absolute'. 2. Characteristics -- shared and unique The characteristics (Pali: lakkhana) of a dhamma are attributes that pertain to that dhamma. Some characteristics are common to all dhammas or to the dhammas of a particular class (e.g., the characteristic of being a nama, of being consciousness, of being a rupa, the characteristics of anicca/dukkha/anatta). Each dhamma also has its own unique characteristic (for example, in the case of seeing, that it experiences visible object). 3. Characteristics can be directly known only by insight into dhammas The characteristic of a dhamma can be directly known only by developed insight, that is to say, insight into that particular (kind of) dhamma. Otherwise, characteristics remain the object of conceptual thinking. 4. Classifications of dhammas Dhammas are classified in the teachings in many different ways. The classifications themselves are not dhammas. In some instances individual categories within a classification comprise a single dhamma (for example the 2 khandhas of sanna and vedana, all the dhatus, most of the ayatanas). In other instances a category within a classification embraces more than a single dhamma (for example, sankhara khandha encompasses 50 cetasikas). So when it is said that the khandhas/ayatanas/dhatus are dhammas, it should be understood in this sense. 5. Conditions as relations between dhammas Dhammas are related to each other in multiple ways. These relations are termed 'conditions' (Pali: paccaya). As with characteristics, these relations can only be directly known by developed insight, that is to say, insight into individual (kinds of) dhammas. For example, it is with the development of insight into visible object and seeing consciousness that it becomes directly known that the former is the object of the latter (an instance of arammana paccaya becoming known). In the example of lobha as hetu paccaya, lobha would be hetu paccaya for the co arising citta. 6. Characteristics and conditions -- dhammas or concepts? Characteristics and conditions are not dhammas, since they do not bear their own characteristics, but neither are they concepts. This is explained in the Visuddhi-Magga passage quoted in Nina's post. There is no rule of abhidhamma that says that 'If it's not a dhamma it must be a concept' or vice versa. What the A-S says is that 'ultimate' dhammas are four-fold, and that concepts are 2-fold (as name and as meaning). The importance of the distinction between dhammas as having own nature and concepts as (mere) name or meaning seems to lie in the fact that there is a strong, deeply ingrained tendency to take concepts for dhammas and accordingly as the potential object of insight development. I do not see the distinction as suggesting that concepts should be ignored or downplayed or whatever. Concepts are necessary for all, including the arahant, but it happens that we are extremely forgetful (lacking in mindfulness) when it comes to perceiving what are dhammas and what are not. Frequent reminders are helpful. The aim is not to have less concepts – the aim is for there to be less ignorance and wrong view about dhammas. Well, those are my comments. BTW, it would not surprise me if there are some differences between what I say here and what others of the (supposed) DSG camp say. There is of course no such thing as the "DSG point of view" ;-)) Jon --- upasaka@a... wrote: ... > Howard: > Mmm. There are lots of things that only occur together but can > still > be distinguished. It seems to me that if the tilakkhana are neither > rupas nor > cittas nor cetasikas nor nibbana, then that leaves Abhidhammikas in the > position of saying that they are nothing but pa~n~natti, and that they > cannot be > objects of insight - that satipatthana does not apply to them, and that > they are, > in fact, nothing at all. > It seems to me that either the view on what constitutes "reality" > needs to be changed, or an Abhidhammika who takes the "DSG point of > view" with > regard to concept and reality is forced into an uncomfortable, if not > outright > upsetting, position. I would love to see a persuasive explanation of why > this is > not so. (So far, it strikes me as a real problem.) > ----------------------------------------------- ... > If a conditioning force were a reality, not imagined, then it > would be > either rupa, citta, cetasika, or nibbana. Also, a "conditioning force", > if > there were such a beast, would not itself be a relation, but a cause for > a > relation. > In any case, notions of "conditioning forces" at the level of > reality > must be very suspect. The Buddha replaced the old, substantialist ideas > of > hidden forces of causality by conditionality, which simply comes down to > "When > this is, that is, and when this arises, that arises". This is part of > what > distinguished the Buddha's notion of idappaccayata from the > substantialist > causality theories of his predecessors. > --------------------------------------------- ... > The force of greed cannot exist apart from *what* state? Greed > cannot > exist apart from greed? I don't get what is being said here. If by > "state" is > meant the citta as mindstate, as opposed to citta as the operation of > awareness (vi~n~nana), then what exactly is a mindstate? It seems to be > a collection > consisting of co-occurring awareness (citta in the 1st sense - > vi~n~nana), > cetasikas, and arammana. But any collection is pa~n~natti. Is then the > root > condition of greed, as a relation, a relation between a nama dhamma > (greed) and a > pa~n~natti (the mindstate)? In any case, the *force* of greed, whatever > sort of > thing that is supposed to be, is not itself a relation. It seems to me > that no > matter how any of this matter is turned, it doesn't bear scrutiny very > well. > ------------------------------------------- ... > Okay, so the "force" terminology is superfluous. We are talking > about > greed. What is the greed related to by the greed-root-relation, and in > exactly > what way? That is - what exactly is the relation being talked about, and > is > that relation merely concept or is it reality? If it is reality, it must > fall > into one of the categories of rupa, citta, cetasika, and nibbana. > ----------------------------------------- ... > Ahh, okay. Here we are starting to zero-in on matters. There is > nothing more than the conditioning and conditioned states. That means > that *there > are no relations*. There are relations only in a manner of speaking. > Relations > are (well grounded) concepts, and nothing more. Okay. That may well be > so! > Relations may well be not events of the type I hypothesized, > multi-phenomenal and > often trans-temporal events. But, then, they are actually nothing at > all. We > can make true statements of syntactically relational form about dhammas, > but we > may not countenance such "things" as actual relations. I will definitely > buy > that! But what does that tell us about concepts? It says to me that at > least > until we are arahants, there is no proper grasping of reality that does > not > indispensably depend on concepts. > ------------------------------------------------ ... > Okay. But look at what would be not known without the concepts > that > take us beyond these dhammas to their characteristics and the relations > among > them. The so called characteristics "to be conditioned, function and > manifest" > in certain ways (of the dhamma, greed, for example) are not the dhamma > itself. > These are to be known by inference by us. Moreover, these > characteristics are > actually nothing at all - as you say. They are concept only. All there > actually are are the dhammas (e.g., greed). > ------------------------------- ... > Okay. So you agree that contiguity relation is pa~n~natti. That > looks > to me like pa~n~natti are essential aspects of "reality", no? If we > throw out > pa~n~natti as mere illusion, then we throw out the tilakkhana and all > properties and relations. Doesn't it start to seem to you, Sarah, that > all this > analysis is an empty house of cards, and that no matter how we try to > describe > reality, the description falls apart? It does to me. All that I am > starting to see > left is that this is a world of empty appearance, with nothing to hold > onto, > nothing independent, nothing substantial or self-existent, and all > worthy only > of relinquishment. (Nagarjuna is looking more and more attractive to me > at > this moment.) > --------------------------------------- ... > No not an aspect of reality. It is either pa~n~natti (and hence > nothing at all, as that is understood on DSG) or it is paramattha > dhamma. > ------------------------------------ ... > If anatta is not pa~n~natti, then it must be either rupa, citta, > cetasika, or nibbana. > ---------------------------------------- ... > Using the word 'aspect' doesn't shed any light. What particular > cetasika is anatta? (It isn't rupa, citta, or nibbana.) In fact, anatta > must, just > like relations (as you ahve so clearly pointed out), be concept. > ---------------------------------------- 39670 From: Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 2:51am Subject: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) Hi, Larry (and Nina) - In a message dated 12/10/04 8:42:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Nina, > > This is not to say that concepts cannot be (mis)apprehended as > impermanent. Nations, chariots, and persons are often so > (mis)apprehended. > > ======================= HOWEVER ... if one tells people that because nations, chariots, and persons are pa~n~natti, they are nothing at all and/or they are permanent, we are far more greatly misleading those people. Each of those amorphous, ungraspable, non-entities still *does* have a mode of existence, and that existence is temporary, not permanent! Nations, chariots, and persons, *particular* ones - and note that it makes perfectly good sense to speak of particular ones, and it would not if there weren't such things at all] - arise, change, and cease as aspects of our sankharically constructed experience, based upon and carved out from the ever-changing, multi-sensory flow of experience that underlies them and all aspects of "our world". It is all a magic show, and that is true at every level of experience, the ultimate as well as the conventional. It is most important, I believe, for us to grasp that *all* experience is conditioned, impermanent, insubstantial, impersonal, and without self-existent reality. We need to come to see this directly, and not just as theory. The reason we need to see this is not a matter of idle curiosity or abstract philosophical and intellectual inquiry, but so that disenchantment grows, and craving and grasping are uprooted, and by means of radical relinquishment, suffering can be ended once and for all. We should never lose sight of what the Dhamma is about. It is about freedom. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39671 From: Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 3:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Prolific Posters Hey, Herman!! Nice to see your voice!! ;-)) With metta, Howard P.S. Christine, is this post short enough not to bump my tally? ;-) In a message dated 12/11/04 7:17:02 AM Eastern Standard Time, hhofman@t... writes: > Hi Christine and everyone, > > I was just contemplating the same subject. > > Of course, and not intended as a correction of your post, there is > the number 0, which is quite a Buddhist number. As a representation > of the unrepresentable, it is perhaps the "original sin". > > And now I've gone and blotted my copybook :-) > > Have enjoyed lurking, though > > Herman > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39672 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 8:32am Subject: Re: The Buddha In His First Week Dear Agrios, Thanks for your reply. This topic 'The Buddha In His First Week' is originally 'The Buddha'. This topic again is continuation of 'Beginner Course' at JourneyToNibbana Yahoo Group. Your request is good for learners. This is a touch job. It will be expounding of paticcasamuppada dhamma or Dependent Co-arising or Dependent Origination and it is written in short as D.O. My current topic is not to go into paticcasamuppada dhamma. The posts are for general background of Buddhism. In Beginner Course posts, I started with simple words and explanation on them. Then I moved to how Bodhisatta of The Buddha Gotama had a wish in becoming a Sammasambuddha. And then moved to events at the palace where Bodhisatta was born. Currently, the topic is in the first week of The Buddha arising. Regarding D.O, there are many experts here in DSG. They will give you valuable guidance. There are many suttas that expound D.O apparently or indirectly. I may also start another thread on D.O. But currently, I am still busy. May you be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "agriosinski" wrote: > > > Avijja or ignorance leads to sankhara or formation or fabrication. > > Sankhara leads to vinnana or consciousness. Vinnana leads to nama- > > rupa or mind-material. Nama-rupa leads to salayatana or 6-sense- base. > > Salayatana leads to phassa or contact. > > > > Phassa leads to vedana or feeling. Vedana leads to tanha or craving. > > Tanha leads to upadana or clinging. Upadana leads to bhavo or > > becoming. Bhava leads to jati or rebirth. Jati leads to jara/marana > > and all other stressful conditions and sufferings of living. There is > > no self at all. > > Dear Htoo, > > Could I have your detailed explanation, in depth picture of what > avija comes to be and how it leads, what exactly happens that sankharas arise. > And then what sankhara is and how it leads to vinnana etc. etc. > Or if you don't feel like writing about it, could you point me to > the other source? > > respectfully, > > Agrios. 39673 From: Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 3:41am Subject: Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... Hi, Jon - In a message dated 12/11/04 10:22:58 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > > Hi Howard (and Sarah) > > Butting in if I may. > > This is not so much a response to your points directly, Howard, as putting > up some other ideas up for consideration or comment, based on my reading > of the texts. > > As a beginner I always like to go back to basics ;-)), so I'll start with > a definition of 'dhamma'. > > 1. 'Dhammas' as 'realities' > The term 'dhammas' has many meanings, but in this context (i.e., as the > object of insight development) it means things that 'bear their own > characteristic'. Visible object and sound, when experienced, have the > same characteristic/s for all beings at all times, and in this sense they > are 'absolute'. ------------------------------------------- Howard: The expression 'bear their own characteristic' isn't clear. Is the dhamma one thing and the characteristic another? At the level of paramathha dhamma, I do not think so. A hardness doesn't "bear" the characteristic of hardness. Hardness *is* hardness, and there is nothing more to say. ------------------------------------------ > > 2. Characteristics -- shared and unique > The characteristics (Pali: lakkhana) of a dhamma are attributes that > pertain to that dhamma. Some characteristics are common to all dhammas or > to the dhammas of a particular class (e.g., the characteristic of being a > nama, of being consciousness, of being a rupa, the characteristics of > anicca/dukkha/anatta). Each dhamma also has its own unique characteristic > (for example, in the case of seeing, that it experiences visible object). ----------------------------------- Howard: Seeing doesn't have the *characteristic* of experiencing visible object. Seeing *is* the experiencing of visible object. ------------------------------------ > > 3. Characteristics can be directly known only by insight into dhammas > The characteristic of a dhamma can be directly known only by developed > insight, that is to say, insight into that particular (kind of) dhamma. > Otherwise, characteristics remain the object of conceptual thinking. > -------------------------------------- Howard: At the level of paramattha dhammas, there are just the dhammas, not characteristics of them. If there is a dhamma and also a characteristic of the dhamma that is not the dhamma itself, and if the characteristic is not imagined - if it is a reality, then that characteristic must be either a rupa, a citta, a cetasika, or nibbana according to Abhidhamma.This kind of close "quantum reality" analysis, Jon, just falls apart the deeper we get into it. We are talking in all this great detail about something we have no direct experience with whatsoever as though we *know* what we are talking about. But when it all starts to dissolve as the analysis gets too fine, we ought to take that as a warning, I think, and back off a bit. -------------------------------------------- > > 4. Classifications of dhammas > Dhammas are classified in the teachings in many different ways. The > classifications themselves are not dhammas. In some instances individual > categories within a classification comprise a single dhamma (for example > the 2 khandhas of sanna and vedana, all the dhatus, most of the ayatanas). > In other instances a category within a classification embraces more than > a single dhamma (for example, sankhara khandha encompasses 50 cetasikas). > So when it is said that the khandhas/ayatanas/dhatus are dhammas, it > should be understood in this sense. > > 5. Conditions as relations between dhammas > Dhammas are related to each other in multiple ways. These relations are > termed 'conditions' (Pali: paccaya). > ------------------------------------- Howard: That is an odd use of language, though, Jon, although I agree that the Patthana uses it. The dhammas are the actual conditions. I don't have a clue what the relations among them are. When there is a relation of determination between dhammas A, B, C, D and dhamma E, the dhammas A,B, C, D are called the conditions and dhamma E is called the conditioned element. A, B, C, and D are conditions for E. What the *relation* is, I don't know. I think that, as Sarah impled, there are just the conditions. And YET, relations among dhammas do hold. A paradox, no? -------------------------------------- As with characteristics, these> > relations can only be directly known by developed insight, that is to say, > insight into individual (kinds of) dhammas. For example, it is with the > development of insight into visible object and seeing consciousness that > it becomes directly known that the former is the object of the latter (an > instance of arammana paccaya becoming known). > > In the example of lobha as hetu paccaya, lobha would be hetu paccaya for > the co arising citta. > > 6. Characteristics and conditions -- dhammas or concepts? > Characteristics and conditions are not dhammas, since they do not bear > their own characteristics, but neither are they concepts. > --------------------------------------- Howard: Wow, the ontology is certainly proliferating! (And whatever happened to "the all"?) ---------------------------------------- This is > explained in the Visuddhi-Magga passage quoted in Nina's post. > There is > no rule of abhidhamma that says that 'If it's not a dhamma it must be a > concept' or vice versa. > ---------------------------------------- Howard: Well, Jon, at this point it seems to me that you are opening the door to the possibility that I put forward of mind-door objects including items that do not appear in any of the khandhas, and of the ayatana breakdown going further than the khandha breakdown. ---------------------------------------- What the A-S says is that 'ultimate' dhammas are> > four-fold, and that concepts are 2-fold (as name and as meaning). > > The importance of the distinction between dhammas as having own nature and > concepts as (mere) name or meaning seems to lie in the fact that there is > a strong, deeply ingrained tendency to take concepts for dhammas and > accordingly as the potential object of insight development. I do not see > the distinction as suggesting that concepts should be ignored or > downplayed or whatever. Concepts are necessary for all, including the > arahant, but it happens that we are extremely forgetful (lacking in > mindfulness) when it comes to perceiving what are dhammas and what are > not. Frequent reminders are helpful. The aim is not to have less > concepts – the aim is for there to be less ignorance and wrong view about > dhammas. > > Well, those are my comments. BTW, it would not surprise me if there are > some differences between what I say here and what others of the (supposed) > DSG camp say. There is of course no such thing as the "DSG point of view" > ;-)) > -------------------------------------------- Howard: I *do* see here some differences in your perspective, greater flexibility especially, from that of some other Abhidhammikas here. I find that heartening, and I find most heartening your final sentence above! ;-) -------------------------------------------- > > Jon > ======================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39674 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 8:43am Subject: Patthana Dhamma Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 24 conditions that relate different dhammas. These can be studied in patthana dhamma. For understanding of patthana dhamma, ultimate realities have to be understood. I have tried to touch these complicated matter. So far there have been 62 pages. If you type this address 'www.geocities.com/htootintnaing/patthana1.html' into the address box and enter, you will be brought to 'Patthana Dhamma' pages. Specific pages can be reached by typing patthana22.html or patthana50.html or so on. So far 'hetu paccayo' 'arammana paccayo' 'adhipati paccayo' and 'anantara paccayo' have been discussed. Even though patthana dhamma seems to be far reaching dhamma or difficult dhamma, actually this dhamma should be learnt in our daily life. Patthana dhamma is behaving in our daily life and we will see them if we are mindful and have some knowledge of patthana dhamma. It is conditional relationship. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 39675 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 10:31am Subject: [dsg] Re: Prolific Posters Who cares Howard? :-) Just keep posting - everyone is enjoying reading them. It's a pleasure to be on a list with so many who know the Dhamma and are willing and able to discuss and share. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hey, Herman!! > > Nice to see your voice!! ;-)) > > With metta, > Howard > > P.S. Christine, is this post short enough not to bump my tally? ;-) 39676 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 11:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Dear friend James, It is good you remark this impression you have of Kh Sujin. Lodewijk said, quite understandable that you have it. I try my best to answer this. Just tell me if something is lacking. But I have to take my time. op 11-12-2004 05:37 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@y...: > Nina: ... Before we know we are > deluded. > > James: I can understand why Kh. Sujin believes that this approach is > necessary because there are many people who are highly deluded. ... > However, and I mean this kindly, Kh. Sujin may be committing what is > called `wrong dhamma' and a `danger to the dhamma'. To quote Ledi > Sayadaw in "Bodhipakkhiya Dipani": > > "This is so because these are times when miccha-dhamma (wrong > Dhamma) that are likely to cause dhammantaraya (danger to the > Dhamma) are rife. ... the belief that these are > times when the Paths and the Fruits can no longer be attained, the > tendency to defer effort until the parami ripen, the belief that > persons of the present day are dvi-hetuka,[38] the belief that the > great teachers of the past were nonexistent, etc. > > 38. Dvi-hetuka-patisandhi--Being reborn with only two root- > conditions: > alobha (detachment) and adosa (amity). Dvi-hetuka-patisandhi > individuals cannot attain the Paths and the Fruits in the present > life. > 39. Ti-hetuka-patisandhi--Being reborn with all the three root- > conditions, namely, alobha, adosa and amoha (wisdom)." N: What a coincidence, just talked about this to you, see Vis. post. > J: It seems that Kh. Sujin is operating under a slight variation of the > belief that people of the present day are dvi-hetuka: that the > people of today don't have enough inherent wisdom to attain the > paths and the fruits of practice. N: Never heard her say this. We cannot tell who is born with two or three hetus. She said that understanding can be developed, and also when born with three hetus understanding should be developed. However, we should not underestimate the extent of ignorance accumulated in countless lives. It is not difficult to know this. Ignorance arises with each akusala citta, and we know that there are countless of them in a day. Thus, how can we expect wisdom to develop rapidly? We should be realistic. The most ancient commentators also spoke of a long time practice: cira kala bhavana. They were wise people. I heard her say in India: courage, patience and good cheer. Thus, no downheartedness. Courage, patience so that we persevere in the development of understanding and of all kinds of kusala. I have Ledi Sayadaw's book, it is very good. Do you have the whole book? You quoted that he said: tendency to defer effort until the parami ripen>. This is strange, because viriya, right effort, is one of paramis, but it should go together with pañña. I recently referred to this. All the paramis: keeps us really busy, I would say!!! J: Therefore, it seems that she > stresses that people should only study the Abhidhamma so that they > may have this wisdom in future lives. N: She never said this, but she stresses all the time that book study does not mean so much. We have to understand seeing at this moment. Not the theory but practice. But correct understanding of some basic principles of the Abhidhamma is a good foundation. I am inspired after India with my Visuddhimagga studies to really consider at each para: what can I learn from this for daily life, for my life now? J: This is probably another > reason why she stresses the idea that one cannot obtain > enlightenment in this lifetime; that enlightenment will take several > lives. N: She did not say that it cannot, but understanding develops gradually, the right conditions have to be fulfilled. It is especially expectations with clinging to a quick result she explains as counteractive. You see, we may hope for enlightenment soon, and exactly that is a danger. We may hope for enlightenment: here is the idea of self not yet eradicated. We must know when this idea comes up. This is the real danger, we *have* to know this. She stressed: one has to develop one's own understanding. It would be easy if someone else would say: do this and this and you will attain. It does not work that way and gives rise to false hopes. You have to be your own refuge, nobody can develop understanding for you. She also reminded us of the Buddha's daily routine: every day he told the bhikkhus: do not be neglectful. J: Personally, I find this a dangerous thing to be teaching. I know > that Kh. Sujin may have the best intentions but the negative karma > for teaching something contrary to the dhamma is very great. Like > those who split the sangha, it could result in an immediate rebirth > in hell. N: I can see from your remark that there are serious misunderstandings about the way Kh. Sujin teaches. Something should be done to straighten this out. Khun Sujin does not teach a Dhamma of despair and indolence. She also refers to the sutta, here often quoted: do not long for the past, that has gone, the future has not come yet, but be aware of this or that dhamma at the present. I do not know my past, I do not know the future. There is this very moment and I should not be lazy but have energy to develop understanding of all that appears one at a time through the six doors. Of what use is it to think of: can I or can I not attain in this life? It will not help me, it is only, only thinking. It is great that she reminds us that worry is *only thinking*, a conditioned mental element. That is all. If I would not know this I would attach great importance to my worry and my thinking. Even though I do not see a spectacular progress (and that would be an idea of my progress!!) I still have confidence in the Way and I am happy and grateful that I have the chance of hearing the Dhamma, even after many centuries after the Buddha's parinibbana. Nina. 39677 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 11:15am Subject: Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations Hi Larry, You mean misapprehended as permanent. Yes, right. We do all the time. Nina op 11-12-2004 02:39 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > This is not to say that concepts cannot be (mis)apprehended as > impermanent. Nations, chariots, and persons are often so > (mis)apprehended. 39678 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 11:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 69- Perception/Sa~n~naa (p) Hello Phil, The Co had no comment to this sutta, but I looked at DIII, 243, The Recital, the Fives, which is similar, but here saññaa is translated as notion. The Co to this: Saññaa of impermanence is saññaa arisen with insight that realizes impermanence. Pali: aniccaanupassanaa ñaa.ne uppanna-saññaa. The same is said of dukkha, etc. Anupassanaa: passanaa is seeing, understanding. Anu: this has the meaning of following closely (the characteristic) or: again and again. Here we see that saññaa is manifold, its quality depends on the citta it arises with. It is good you asked! By the way, it is very nice if you would share what you read in the Roots of Good and Evil with your comments. It has many inspiring suttas, and Naresh would like that. For us all a good reminder. Nina. op 10-12-2004 13:03 schreef plnao op plnao@j...:> >> We read in the Gradual Sayings (Book of the >> Tens, Chapter VI, §6, Ideas) about ten kinds of saññå ... >> -The idea of the foul, of death, ... 39679 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 11:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV, 122 and Tiika, roots. Dear Friend James, op 11-12-2004 04:49 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@y...: >> Vis. XIV, 122 and Tiika >> It is said that kamma does not produce retention that is more > outstanding >> (more superior, ukka.t.thara) than itself. Mahaa-kusala citta with > two >> roots, for example, does not produce retention with three roots. > (See >> Expositor, p. 356, which gives opinions of different teachers.) > > Could you explain more what this means? What are the root causes > and how are they influenced by kamma? N: Roots, hetus. I quote from Ven. Nyanaponika, the Roots of good and evil http://www.geocities.com/ekchew.geo/rootsofgoodandevilC.html: end quote. Kusala kamma has different degrees. It is always accompanied by non-greed (alobha) and non-hatred (adosa), and it may or may not be accompanied by wisdom. When you give something you may do so with the understanding that giving is wholesome and that kusala brings its corresponding result. Or someone who has never heard the Buddha's teaching gives, but without this understanding. You may chant Pali in the Temple without understanding the meaning, or you may have learnt what it means and chant with understanding of the texts. There are many other factors that make kusala kamma strong or less strong. You may have hesitation in giving and then prompt yourself to give, or someone else may urge you. Then kamma is called prompted. It is stronger when you spontaneously give with your whole heart. Then there are still other factors. When you perform a deed there are many cittas involved before and after it. When you do a good deed, helping someone, there may be unwholesome thoughts afterwards: look how good I am, or, I hope others like me, etc. This will influence the result of the good deed, it conditions it to be less superior. You like to give but you are impatient preparing the materials, wrapping up the gifts without care, or you afterwards have thoughts of stinginess: it is more expensive than I thought. Results of kamma: When you are born, the first citta, rebirth-consciousness is citta that is result of kamma. We are born as a human, and in this case rebirth-consciousness is a wholesome result. One may be reborn with roots, namely with two roots: non-greed and non-hate, or with three roots, then there is wisdom as well. This influences your whole life, you have more possibilities to develop wisdom. The roots with cittas that are result are not active, one can see them as passive, as reflection in a mirror. Vis. text: Associated dhammas: this includes the roots accompanying the citta. Thus, kamma with three roots that is superior can produce result with three roots. Then there is no difference in the associated dhammas, but, they are passive. Degrees of kamma: ============== I quote from my former Vis. studies some passages: Kusala kamma that is unprompted, not induced, is stronger than kusala kamma that is induced, performed by a citta that has some hesitation. As we have seen in the section on kusala citta: But it is not so that unprompted kusala kamma must necessarily produce sahetuka vipaakacitta (resultant citta with roots) that is unprompted. We read in the Commentary to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha (Topics of Abhidhamma, p. 193, 194) that excellent kusala kamma with three roots produces rebirth with three roots and that inferior kusala kamma with three roots and excellent kusala kamma with two roots produces rebirth with two roots. Kusala kamma performed by kusala citta that is with wisdom, accompanied by pleasant feeling and unprompted does not necessarily produce rebirth-consciousness that is vipaakacitta with wisdom, accompanied by pleasant feeling and unprompted. The reason is that kusala kamma is of different degrees and they all produce their results accordingly. There is excellent kusala kamma and inferior kusala kamma. When kusala citta with wisdom performs kusala kamma, the wisdom or understanding can be of different degrees. There may be understanding that kusala brings its result accordingly, or understanding of the degree of insight that realizes kusala as non-self. Or kusala kamma may be performed without understanding, depending on conditions. It depends on many conditions what type of kusala citta arises at a particular moment. Different opinions of teachers are quoted by Buddhaghosa (Expositor (II, p. 358 and following). When there are other opinions he mentions them. He is matter of fact in his conclusion: He quotes also from three Elders: He then goes on analysing the different opinions very carefully. Nina. 39680 From: m. nease Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 11:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" [Sukin]n Hi Howard, ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 4:15 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" [Sukin]n >> I've given this some thought and this is how it seems to me: Cetasikas >> such >> as phassa and vedanaa don't infect and are not infected. Because they're >> universal they can arise with cittas that are defiled by akusala >> cetasikas >> such as moha and lobha etc. So as I see it it is the citta that is >> defiled, >> not the cetasikas (though the defilements are cetasikas). >> > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Your thoughts on this are interesting, Mike, but I'm not certain I > agree. You are saying that it is the citta that is defiled due to certain > cetasikas being defiled, but not the phassa or vedana. Not quite--some cetasikas are defilements (as opposed to defiled), but not phassa or vedanaa. > Now, there are two senses to > 'citta'. Yes--and a lot more, also-- > One of these senses is vi~n~nana, the "awareness operation". Now, > vi~n~nana I *do* see as infected in the non-arahant, because, for such a > "being" > it is a knowing that is infected by the sense of subjectivity (or knowing > subject/agent). This sounds right, As I see it, any vi~n~naa.na would be necessarily defiled by at least latent kilesa(s) (all of which are cetasikas of course)--the 'sense of subjectivity (or knowing subject/agent)' doesn't enter into it at all, as I see it. Of course I could well be wrong--I'd be interested in any support for this from the Paali texts. > But vi~n~nana is but one link of D.O., and as far as "infection" is > concerned, it, like all the other links, performs a store-and-forward (or > transmission) function - it is a carrier. If you mean that phassa and vedanaa occuring in pa.ticcasamuppaada must arise with at least latent defilements, I agree (because pa.ticcasamuppaada doesn't occur for an arahant). > Because of the atta-infection > tranmitted from avijja through sankhara into vi~n~nana, it cascades from > there through > all the subsequent links of D.O. chain. If by 'atta-infection' you mean 'self view' (attadi.t.thi) I don't think it's necessarily present in each link. I've always felt that 'self' comes in at links nine and ten-- 9. Upadana paccaya bhavo: through Clinging is conditioned the process of kamma-formations and becoming (kammabhava and Upapattibhava). 10. Bhava paccaya jati: through the process of kamma formation (kammabhava) is conditioned Rebirth. Not sure though-- > The other sense is of "mindstate". But a mindstate is not a > paramattha > dhamma. It is a collection of co-occuring phenomena - citta, cetasikas, > and > maybe a rupa as arammana, which means that a citta is not a direct element > of > experience. To say that it is infected is just a manner of speaking, where > it > is actually the dhammas that underlie it which are infected. I like the way you've put this and think I agree, now that I see (I think) what you mean. By my reading of the texts 'citta' sometimes refers to 'mind' (or your 'mindstate') in the conventional sense. In this sense, saying that it's 'infected' is a reasonable expression, I think, though I guess I prefer 'defiled' just from habit. Thanks again for the interesting discussion. mike 39681 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 0:21pm Subject: Re: quiz answers- Phil (was Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 70- Perception/Sa~n~naa (q)) Hello Phil: I am glad you try to answer. I have to check myself as to the answers. op 11-12-2004 14:26 schreef plnao op plnao@j...: . What does it > mean to say that sanna "marks" an object? I know the metaphor of > the carpenter marking the wood. That I can understand. But how > sanna marks an object. N: We can say, it is figurative,: memorize. Like Pali words we try to memorize, so that we remember later on. But we can also say: mark or remember, using the two expressions. Ph: ii When we see a house, through which doorway does saññå >> perform its function? > > When we see a "house", rather than a visible object, there is a > concept, not a reality. So I guess the mind door? N: Right. Cittas which think of concepts arise in a mind-door process. Ph: iii When we mistake something for something else, how can >> there still be saññå at such a moment? > > I look out the window and see a huge full moon in the sky. There > is a concept. Sanna marks it. Then I realize it is a lightbulb hanging from > the balcony roof. Sanna marks it. It doesn't matter which one is > really the moon, and which is the lightbulb. They're both concepts. > Just taking a wild shot here. N: Excellent. In hotels A. Sujin used to ask us: is it a fake plant or a real plant. We may take it for real. But in both cases there is likely to be perversity of sañña. Ph: iv When we recognize a house, can there be perversion of >> saññå? > If we think it is something that will last, is permanent, there > is a perversion of perception. N: Excellent. But there is perversity of sañña with each akusala citta. Ph: Just as if we see something > foul (human body) and believe it to be fair. ... A pendant hung enticingly > at the top of her cleavage. The pendant said > "come, reflect on my beauty, and that > of those that lie just below." > I reflected instead on the foulness of the > body to keep my mind from "going there" any further. It > was quite effective. It helped me to connect with her in > a more wholesome way, a more helpful way for both of us. N: You made me laugh, you really have a great sense of humor. Ph: Can the sotåpanna think of concepts and recognize people >> and things? > > Sure. He or she still has lobha, a lot of lobha, so can mistake > that which is foul for that which is fair. The sotapanna is rid > of doubt, and self-view, and he can no longer have lobha or > dosa of a strength that could cause a transgression, but > there is still clinging. N: Also the Buddha recognized Ananda and Sariputta. >> vi Give examples of akusala saññå. > Ph: "To hold that in dukka there is non-dukkha" Let's say I go > to a baseball game and drink lots of beer. Sanna does not > mark the beer correctly, so there is not the correct > perception of dukkha. N: When we speak of dukkha, I think of the truth of dukkha: impermanent, not worth clinging to. I do not take dukkha in a conventional way, as a situation with beer drinking. Akusala sañña: with each akusala citta, with akusala kamma through body, speech and mind. The akusala citta experiences an object and sañña marks or recognizes it at that moment. Ph:>> vii How can one develop 'perception of impermanence' (anicca >> saññå)? > Patience. Cultivating panna. Knowing realities as they > appear through the six doors. N: Yes, see my other post to you. Patience is wholesome energy. I appreciate your answers, Phil. Nina. 39682 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 0:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Phra Dhammadharo Hello Phil, You are too kind. Besides, I am older now: 76 :-)) I am not so constant at present realities as you think. I have to learn. But I do not doubt about the right way to take. Now about the late Phra Dhammadharo: sati once in a life time. I knew him and he had such a strong way of expressing himself, in order to push people a bit ahead, like a shock therapy. We should see this in the context of his speech, but you can't now, he passed away. He became a layman, and then he did not use such forceful expressions. We cannot count sati, we cannot say it has to be such or such, or only once. But he wanted to show that sati is valuable, but don't cling. It can be accumulated. We should not be impatient and wish for it, with an idea of self. He wanted to convey this message. I like your dialogue with Jon. Nina. op 11-12-2004 12:38 schreef plnao op plnao@j...: > I always am so inspired when Nina is so constant, so undoubting about the > importance > of present realities. When I am her age, will I be so courageous, or will I > waver and > hedge my bets and grasp at comforting views that conceal a subtle clinging > to eternalsm? > (I know, 75 is not so old...) 39683 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 0:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 166 ) Dear Htoo and Phil, also maha-vipaka citta with pleasant feeling can perform the function of retention. I find all the details about feeling arising with retention very complicated. I have been struggling with it. So many intricate conditions are operating. Nina. op 11-12-2004 12:43 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > Another function is tadarammana function or retention function. When > javana cittas are all somanassa, then tadarammana cittas have to be > somanassa. If santirana cittas have to arise as tadarammana cittas, > then they will be somanassa santirana in this case. 39684 From: m. nease Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 0:39pm Subject: Re: Di.t.thijukamma, was Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi Nina and Sarah, ----- Original Message ----- > --- "m. nease" wrote: >> > Nibbaana arises for only one moment, I think (when 'it' would >> naturally be >> > 'marked' by sa~n~naa as that is one of sa~n~naa's functions)--I don't >> see >> > why the reviewing after nibbaana might not take a concept (the memory >> of >> > nibbaana?) as an object--but I really don't know. >> N: I think this is what Sarah and I discussed: not so classifiable >> object: >> navattabbamaarama.na. >> Thus, we cannot say it is a concept, it is reality, but reviewed >> afterwards >> by kaamaavacara citta with pañña, not directly experienced by lokuttara >> citta. I should verify this with Sarah. > ... > S: Yes. A reality. The same characteristic experienced by these > kaamaavacara cittas with panna. Also the defilements eradicated etc. It's > not thinking. K.Sujin says (and I'm pretty sure I've read it in Dispeller > too) that when navattabbamaarama.na is understood with this first example, > the other examples can be understood, such as how panna undestands sense > objects or namas just fallen away etc etc. Mike, see > 'navattabbamaarama.na' in UP. It can refer to realities by way of > navattabbaraarama.na, as in these examples, or to concepts as in nimitta > experienced by jhanas etc. Right Sarah, thanks for this, at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/32619. Very interesting and useful I think--clears up a lot of minute but important questions. > p.s Mike, have you heard anything of particular interest on the India > recordings? Nothing to single out as yet-- > Can you listen to these Buddhists while you do your Nudist work;-) No trouble at all--though I do find that reflecting on Dhamma tends to diminish my interest in the subject matter--temporarily, of course...! mike 39685 From: plnao Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 1:47pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Phra Dhammadharo Hello Nina, and all > Now about the late Phra Dhammadharo: sati once in a life time. I knew him > and he had such a strong way of expressing himself, in order to push people > a bit ahead, like a shock therapy. Yes, there is always some resistance when I read that interview/talk ("Be Here Now"- available at abhidhamma.org) But as I said, it's always good for me to read it, because he does make a very compelling case and what he says is difficult to disregard. He must have been a very stimulating person to talk to. >We should see this in the context of his > speech, but you can't now, he passed away. He became a layman, and then he > did not use such forceful expressions. We cannot count sati, we cannot say > it has to be such or such, or only once. But he wanted to show that sati is > valuable, but don't cling. It can be accumulated. We should not be impatient > and wish for it, with an idea of self. He wanted to convey this message. You know, I think this is a very important point. When I first came across your books, and the above-mentionned Bhante, and K Sujin, I struggled with this notion of the rarity of sati. You remember I asked about it quite often, comparing the idea of such rarity with other teachers such as Ajahn Chah, who say sati should be maintained as constantly as possible. Gradually, those questions have died down. I see that the point is patience. It's very helpful. I'm afraid many people don't get that, and see pessimism. But if the message were rephrased in a more comforting way, it's helpful power would be lost. I feel grateful that I "got" it. Sati can be accumulated. It is accumulated. That is enough to be encouraged by. > I like your dialogue with Jon. Thanks Nina. And good luck for your father's birthday concert preparations. 104! Metta, Phil 39686 From: Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 4:54pm Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) Howard: "HOWEVER ... if one tells people that because nations, chariots, and persons are pa~n~natti, they are nothing at all and/or they are permanent, we are far more greatly misleading those people." Hi Howard and Nina, I agree. I think it is probably good to recognize the impermanence of conventional realities. The only draw back is that nations, chariots, and persons etc. can't be experienced directly so in that case the tilakkhana doesn't lead to path consciousness. I was only making the rather nit-picky point that impermanence etc. can be apprehended as a characteristic of concepts. Larry 39687 From: m. nease Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 5:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi Nina, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nina van Gorkom" To: Sent: Saturday, December 11, 2004 11:15 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Khun Sujin does not teach a Dhamma of despair and indolence. She also refers to the sutta, here often quoted: do not long for the past, that has gone, the future has not come yet, but be aware of this or that dhamma at the present. I do not know my past, I do not know the future. There is this very moment and I should not be lazy but have energy to develop understanding of all that appears one at a time through the six doors. Of what use is it to think of: can I or can I not attain in this life? It will not help me, it is only, only thinking. It is great that she reminds us that worry is *only thinking*, a conditioned mental element. That is all. If I would not know this I would attach great importance to my worry and my thinking. Even though I do not see a spectacular progress (and that would be an idea of my progress!!) I still have confidence in the Way and I am happy and grateful that I have the chance of hearing the Dhamma, even after many centuries after the Buddha's parinibbana. Nina. Heartfelt thanks for these thoughtful corrections of misinterpretations of Khun Sujin's efforts. It would be unfortunate if anyone were mislead by misconceptions and/or misrepresentations of her words. mike 39688 From: kenhowardau Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 7:00pm Subject: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > Howard: "HOWEVER ... if one tells people that because nations, chariots, > and persons are pa~n~natti, they are nothing at all and/or they are > permanent, we are far more greatly misleading those people." > > Hi Howard and Nina, > > I agree. I think it is probably good to recognize the impermanence of > conventional realities. Hi Howard and Larry, You could be right, but I don't see why. For example, scientists say you and I are made of stardust. That is, the elements that compose our bodies have been in existence since they were created in a star's nuclear reactor ten or more billion years ago. Is stardust impermanent? I suppose it will eventually decay, but so what? The realisation of that sort impermanence is hardly life changing. ------------------------------------ L: > The only draw back is that nations, chariots, > and persons etc. can't be experienced directly so in that case the > tilakkhana doesn't lead to path consciousness. > ------------------------------------- The tilakkhana of what? Of nations, chariots and persons? According to whose Dhamma, do concepts have tilakkhana? ------------------------- L: > I was only making the rather nit-picky point that impermanence etc. can > be apprehended as a characteristic of concepts. > ------------------------- Oh, I see. "Impermanence" can be deduced by seeing that the concepts of today aren't exactly the concepts of yesterday (discounting stardust and the like). But that impermanence is not anicca, is it? We might *call* it a characteristic, but it isn't anything real: it is just a logical conclusion. The characteristics (anicca, dukkha and anatta) that the Buddha taught are real - their existence owes nothing to logical conclusions. Ken H 39689 From: Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 8:45pm Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) Hi Ken H, Re: L: "I agree. I think it is probably good to recognize the impermanence of conventional realities." K: "You could be right, but I don't see why." L: Your family is impermanent, your friends are impermanent, your mentors are impermanent, your health is impermanent, your wealth is impermanent, your job is impermanent, your possessions are impermanent, your entertainment is impermanent, anything you enjoy is impermanent. These are all conventional realities. Don't you think it would be a good idea to recognize that they are impermanent? Larry 39690 From: Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 4:54pm Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) In a message dated 12/11/2004 8:49:46 PM Pacific Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: L: Your family is impermanent, your friends are impermanent, your mentors are impermanent, your health is impermanent, your wealth is impermanent, your job is impermanent, your possessions are impermanent, your entertainment is impermanent, anything you enjoy is impermanent. These are all conventional realities. Don't you think it would be a good idea to recognize that they are impermanent? Larry Hi Larry That's exactly right and not only that...the way you state it above is very often the way the Buddha taught it. TG 39691 From: Egbert Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 10:36pm Subject: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... I find this a very interesting discussion, Jon, Howard and everyone, The things you have written for further consideration, Jon, have started to bear their fruit, and I have a number of questions. But I'll ask just the one for the moment, time being a limiting factor. > > 1. 'Dhammas' as 'realities' > The term 'dhammas' has many meanings, but in this context (i.e., as the object of insight development) it means things that 'bear their own characteristic'. Visible object and sound, when experienced, have the same characteristic/s for all beings at all times, and in this sense they are 'absolute'. I am wondering about your usage of the terms "absolute" and "same". In the way I would use the terms, no thing can be the same as an absolute, and if it were, it would render the absolute relative. Am I misreading your usage? And what is to be said about the visual experiences of a colour- blind being and a not colour blind being sitting in a room with every surface painted red? I can see that whatever is experienced individually is absolutely experienced, but in which way are their experiences the same? Kind Regards Herman 39692 From: Bhikkhu Samahita Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 9:35pm Subject: Ultimate Facts ... !!! Friends: Ultimately Advantageous Truths: Seeing that All States is Changing & immediately Passing and therefore ultimately a surely Disappointing & Frustrating Loss & consequently furthermore neither-me-nor-mine-nor-any-self is the most intelligent & advantageous form of Ultra-Realism, since it releases all Craving & relinquishes all even subtle Glinging... This same craving & clinging is the very core cause of all Misery! Knowing & being assured of that Nothing really is Worth Clinging to stirs & inspires to train thoroughly, since all will eventually vanish! Whatever do Develop, will also Decay... Whatever do Arise, will also Cease... Whatever do Begin, will also End... Whoever is born, will also Die... The Buddha, Dhamma & Sangha is thus the only real Refuge...!!! The Noble 8-fold Way is thus the only real Escape...!!! Nibbana is thus the only real Safety...!!! Friendship is the Greatest ! Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. 39693 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 2:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Phra Dhammadharo, Phil, Herman. Hello Phil (and Herman at the end), op 11-12-2004 22:47 schreef plnao op plnao@j...:> what he says is difficult to disregard. He must have been a very > stimulating person to talk to. N: He explained Dhamma very clearly and lively, you do not forget it what he said, Azita will agree. He was very kind and generous, and this appeared more when he had become a layman. Of course there has to be a certain distance between bhikkhu and laypeople. Ph: I see > that the > point is patience. It's very helpful. I'm afraid many people don't get that, > and see pessimism. But if the message were rephrased in a more comforting way, it's > helpful power would be lost. I feel grateful that I "got" it. > Sati can be accumulated. It is accumulated. That is enough to be encouraged > by. N: In India we talked about imitation patience and false patience. Kh. Sujin remarked that patience is viriya, energy. Patience, khanti, is not a separate cetasika, but it describes a wholesome quality. It is certainly not a passive, indolent waiting for sati or an imitation patience. How difficult to rightly understand what Kh Sujin and also Phra Dhammadharo said. I am glad you got it. We first dislike it, we are not ready for it yet, but after considering more we see the value. I spoke to Kh. Sujin about my worry concerning Lodewijk's health I had during this year. She said: it is only a nama, a kind of thinking. I disliked this and mentioned later on that it felt like a cold shower. You have to swallow and speak about something you take to heart and then you have to hear this. But after considering I found it most helpful. We find our problems so important and get drowned in the ocean of concepts. But there is the island of Dhamma. Worry is just a kind of thinking, and it can be realized as such. You have problems and everybody has. If you would tell Kh Sujin she would answer the same: just a kind of thinking, it is conditioned and already past. Is it not true that we make it very big and important? What she says is deep, it is wise, it is most effective. The same when Lodewijk cannot accept: there is no Nina. He finds it clearer now but he says that some explanations are necessary. Kh Sujin said: Is seeing Nina, is hearing Nina? To which dhamma does one cling? One only clings to the name. Bitter medicine! As to sickness, Lodewijk just read the Sutta about Nakulapitar (S.N. III): how is the body sick but the mind is not sick. B.T.W. India was very good for his health, he started eating more. As I said, we shall go again to India, inspite of the bodily disconfort. Ph: Thanks Nina. And good luck for your father's birthday concert preparations. > 104! N: Thank you for your thoughtfulness. The dog likes the music so much, and then he starts to go near me and pushes my music stand, so that the book falls down. (Hey Herman: Music. I thought of you, and see, there you are. Nice to see you) Rehearsing today with my nephews. Nina. 39694 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 2:38am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 71- Volition/cetanaa (a) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.4 Volition(cetanaa]] ***** Cetanå, volition, is another cetasika among the ‘universals’, the seven cetasikas which accompany every citta. Cetanå is often translated as ‘volition’, but we should not be misled by the conventional term which designates the reality of cetanå. Cetanå accompanies, together with phassa (contact), vedanå (feeling), saññå (remembrance) and the other ‘universals’, all cittas of the four jåtis. Thus, cetanå accompanies kusala citta, akusala citta, vipåkacitta and kiriyacitta. When we intend to steal or when we make the resolution not to kill, it is evident that there is cetanå. However, also when we are seeing or hearing, and even when we are asleep, there is cetanå since it accompanies every citta. There is no citta without cetanå. ***** [Ch.4 Volition(cetanaa) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 39695 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 2:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Letter to B.Bodhi-'The Jhânas and the Lay Disciple ..' Dear Friends, Yesterday I received a reply from B.Bodhi to the letter I copied to the list recently: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/39500 Comments are most welcome as usual. [His postscript is not relevant to this discussion, but after some dithering, I’m keeping it in the message here as 'pabhassaram cittam' (luminous mind) has also been a very popular topic here and I’ll repost a link to his earlier letter when I find it to send back to him. (Meanwhile, newcomers to DSG may like to look under ‘luminous’ in UP).] ***** From B.Bodhi: ….. >Dear Sarah, Thank you for taking the time and trouble to summarize the main points of the discussion. The point format makes it easy to follow. Your comments represent a "synthetic view," that is, an interpretation that synthesizes sutta, Abhidhamma, and commentaries, along with the mode of interpreting these developed by K. Sujin. In my paper, I wanted to confine myself to the strict standpoint of the Nikayas. To do so is not to devalue the contributions the other sources make to our understanding, but to limit one's sources to those that can reasonably be assigned to the earliest period of Buddhist textual composition. On that basis I do not see any text that explicitly admits the possibility of attaining the last two stages of realization, non-return and arahantship, without the first jhana as a minimum. One can find ways to affirm such attainments as rational possibilities, as you have done, but to do so one has to apply to the texts certain presuppositions and modes of interpretation that cannot be derived from the suttas themselves. I wouldn't reject them, and in fact I respect the commentarial recognition of a dry-visioned arahant. This type of arahant is also admitted in the North Indian Abhidharma system, under the name "dry-wisdom arhat"; apparently, since they both use the word 'dry', they likely derive from a common source and thus perhaps go back to a period before the two systems became divided. But the fact remains that such a type does not explicitly appear either under that name or under some synonymous term or description in the Pali Nikayas. There are also no texts that say that the sotapannas and sakadagamis don't have any jhana. This, again, is a conclusion that has to be derived by reasoning from the texts. But the fact that the suttas do not routinely ascribe jhanas to them gives strong support to this conclusion, as do certain other considerations militate (particularly, the fact that they take rebirth in the human and deva worlds, which seems unlikely for one who has mastered the jhanas). Thanks for the invitation to provide support if I return to Hong Kong. I wasn't contemplating another Far Eastern journey in the near future, but I'll let you know if by chance I come that way. With metta, BB. P.S. I had meant to ask you: A couple of years ago, I think it was in the course of the last trip -- of late 2002 -- I made to the Far East, I had sent you a letter commenting on the 'pabhassaram cittam' (luminous mind) idea. I seem to have accidentally deleted that file from my hard drive, probably thinking it was just a routine letter with nothing of continuing relevance. Sometimes I get inquiries about my understanding of this phrase, and it would be useful if I could have that letter on hand so I don't have to repeat myself. Nowadays, to save time, I just state my view in a single sentence, but if I had the file I could give a fuller account. Would you happen to have that letter, and if so, could you send it back to me? >Thanks. [end B.Bodhi's letter] ***** --- sarah abbott wrote: > As most people will recall, some time ago I posted an article by Bhikkhu > Bodhi: > “The Jhânas and the Lay Disciple According to the Pâli Suttas” > I’m not aware that it has been published and may still be a draft, but > it > can be seen here: > http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha267.htm 39696 From: connieparker Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 7:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Letter to B.Bodhi-'The Jhânas and the Lay Disciple ..' Hi, Friends, B Bodhi: There are also no texts that say that the sotapannas and sakadagamis don't have any jhana. This, again, is a conclusion that has to be derived by reasoning from the texts. But the fact that the suttas do not routinely ascribe jhanas to them gives strong support to this conclusion, as do certain other considerations militate (particularly, the fact that they take rebirth in the human and deva worlds, which seems unlikely for one who has mastered the jhanas). Connie: I know the dictionary says they take human rebirth, but can anyone name one who was? Aside from the momentary life goes on before cuti rebirth, I mean. I guess the right kinds of jhana / factors just develop faster / naturally at a certain level of understanding. thank you. 39697 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 7:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Letter to B.Bodhi-'The Jhânas and the Lay Disciple ..' --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connieparker wrote: > > > Connie: I know the dictionary says they take human rebirth, but can > anyone name one who was? Aside from the momentary life goes on before > cuti rebirth, I mean. > ======== Dear Connie, From memory all the sotapannas and sakadagamis in the tipitaka go to the deva world only. Howver it is said that Sakka will one day be born as a human. Robertk 39698 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 10:56am Subject: Dhamma Thread (171) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 89 cittas or 89 mental states or 89 states of consciousness. Among them 18 cittas are ahetuka cittas or rootless consciousness. 71 cittas are sahetuka cittas or they arise with root dhamma such as lobha, dosa, moha, alobha, adosa, and amoha. 2 cittas are ekahetuka cittas, 22 cittas are dvihetuka cittas, 47 cittas are tihetuka cittas. Eka means 'one'. Ekahetuka cittas have only one root and it is moha root. It is ignorance. Tihetuka cittas have three roots. They are alobha, adosa, and amoha. These 3 roots can arise together. But there are 22 dvihetuka cittas. They have 2 roots. These 2 roots have exact combination. 1. lobha + moha 2. dosa + moha 3. alobha + adosa Lobha and dosa never arise together. Kusala and akusala never arise together. So far we have discussed on 18 ahetuka cittas or rootless consciousness, 2 ekahetuka cittas or 2 single-rooted consciousness, 8 dvihetuka cittas or lobha cittas, 2 dvihetuka cittas of dosa cittas. There still left 12 dvihetuka cittas. These 12 dvihetuka cittas are kama sobhana cittas and they are nana vippayutta cittas. Nana is pannidriya cetasika and it is also amoha root. As there is no panna, then there will be only 2 roots in these beautiful consciousness. They are alobha and adosa roots. They are 4 mahakusala cittas, 4 mahavipaka cittas, and 4 mahakiriya cittas. 1. somanassa saha gatam nana vippayuttam asankharika mahakusala citta 2. somanassa saha gatam nana vippayuttam sasankharika mahakusala citta 3. upekkha saha gatam nana vippayuttam asankharika mahakusala citta 4. upekkha saha gatam nana vippayuttam sasankharika mahakusala citta 5.somanassa saha gatam nana vipayuttam asankharika mahavipaka citta 6.somanassa saha gatam nana vippayuttam sasankharika mahavipaka citta 7. upekkha saha gatam nana vippayuttam asankharika mahavipaka citta 8. upekkha saha gatam nana vipaayuttam sasankharika mahavipaka citta 9. somanassa saha gatam nana vippayuttam asankharika mahakiriya citta 10.somanassa saha gatam nana vippayuttam sasankharika mahakiriya citta 11. upekkha saha gatam nana vippayuttam asankharika mahakiriya citta 12. upekkha saha gatam nana vippayuttam sasankharika mahakiriya citta As all these 12 cittas do not have panna cetasika, and they just have alobha and adosa hetus, they are called dvihetuka cittas. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39699 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 11:06am Subject: Dhamma Thread (172) Dear Dhamma Friends, 18 cittas are ahetuka cittas, 2 cittas are ekahetuka cittas, 22 cittas are dvihetuka cittas and 47 cittas are tihetuka cittas. Altogether there are 89 cittas. 18 cittas do not have any root from 6 roots. 6 roots are lobha, dosa, moha, alobha, adosa, and amoha. 2 cittas just have one root. It is moha root. And they are called ekahetuka cittas or single-rooted consciousness. 22 cittas have two roots. There are 3 different combination of roots for double-rooted cittas. a) 8 lobha mula cittas ( lobha + moha ) b) 2 dosa mula cittas ( dosa + moha ) c)12 nana vippayutta cittas ( alobha + adosa ) ---------- 22 dvihetuka cittas. 47 cittas have 3 roots. These 3 roots are alobha, adosa and amoha or panna. They are a) 12 kamavacara nana sampayutta cittas b) 15 rupavacara cittas c) 12 arupavacara cittas d) 8 lokuttara cittas ------- 47 tihetuka cittas All these 47 cittas have three roots. These 3 roots are alobha, adosa and amoha or panna. In summary, there are 18 ahetuka cittas, 2 ekahetuka cittas, 22 dvihetuka cittas and 47 tihetuka cittas. So far we have discussed on vedana classification and hetu classification on cittas. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39700 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 11:16am Subject: Re: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 71- Volition/cetanaa (a) Dear Sarah and Nina, Not different view. But I would like to mention one thing here. That cetana is serving as 'sahajata-kamma paccaya'. All cittas have cetana. Each has cetana and this cetana serves as 'sahajata-kamma paccaya'. Once I discussed with Nina regarding cetana. There are 4 kinds of ahara. They are 1.kabballikaara ahara ( some spell 'kabballinkara' ) 2.phassa ahara 3.manosancetana ahara 4.vinnaana ahara In nama-ahara cetana cetasika is included. But I believe this cetana is not all cetana. I mean this cetana which is ahara is not cetana that accompanies any kind of citta. This cetana is confined to only 29 cittas. They are 12 akusala cittas, 8 mahakusala cittas, 5 rupakusala cittas, and 4 arupakusala cittas ( 12 + 8 + 5 + 4 = 29 cittas ). Any thought? With Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Dear Friends, > > 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom > > http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html > http://www.zolag.co.uk/ > > Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) > ========================================== > [Ch.4 Volition(cetanaa]] > ***** > Cetanå, volition, is another cetasika among the `universals', the > seven cetasikas which accompany every citta. Cetanå is often > translated as `volition', but we should not be misled by the > conventional term which designates the reality of cetanå. > > Cetanå accompanies, together with phassa (contact), vedanå (feeling), > saññå (remembrance) and the other `universals', all cittas of the > four jåtis. Thus, cetanå accompanies kusala citta, akusala citta, > vipåkacitta and kiriyacitta. > > When we intend to steal or when we make the resolution not to kill, it is > evident that there is cetanå. However, also when we are seeing or hearing, > and even when we are asleep, there is cetanå since it accompanies every > citta. There is no citta without cetanå. > ***** > [Ch.4 Volition(cetanaa) to be contd] > > Metta, > > Sarah > ====== 39701 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 11:36am Subject: Dhamma Thread (173) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 89 cittas. They can be classified into according to their origin or jati or the kind of dhamma. There are akusala dhamma, kusala dhamma and abyakata dhamma. Akusala dhamma give rise to akusala vipaka or 'bad results' and kusala dhamma give rise to kusala vipaka or 'good results'. But abyakata dhamma are dhamma that do not give rise to further effects. These abykata dhamma among cittas are vipaka dhamma and kiriya dhamma. Vipaka are resultant and so there is no further effect arises because of arising of these vipaka dhamma. As it is already cooked, there is nothing to do with further effect. Kiriya dhamma are also abyakata dhamma. Kiriya cittas are cittas of arahats and they are totally free of defilements. Because of this power, there is no further effect because of arising of these kiriya cittas. So 89 cittas can be classified into a) 12 akusala cittas b) 21 kusala cittas c) 36 vipaka cittas d) 20 kiriya cittas --------------------- 89 cittas 12 akusala cittas are 8 lobha cittas, 2 dosa cittas, and 2 moha cittas. 21 kusala cittas are 8 mahakusala cittas, 5 rupakusala cittas, and 4 arupakusala cittas ( 8+5+4= 17 loki kusala cittas ), and 4 lokuttara kusala cittas which are magga cittas. So there are 17 loki kusala and 4 lokuttara kusala cittas altogether 21 kusala cittas. 36 vipaka cittas are 1. 7 ahetuka akusala vipaka cittas 2. 8 ahetuka kusala vipaka cittas 3. 8 sahetuka kusala vipaka cittas ( 8 mahavipaka cittas ) 4. 5 rupavipaka cittas 5. 4 arupavipaka cittas( 7+8+8+5+4= 32 loki vipaka cittas ) 6. 4 lokuttara vipaka cittas ( 4 phala cittas ) ------------- 36 vipaka cittas ( 32 + 4 = 36 cittas ) 20 kiriya cittas are 1. 3 kama ahetuka kiriya cittas 2. 8 kama sahetuka kiriya cittas 3. 5 rupakiriya cittas 4. 4 arupakiriya cittas ------- 20 kiriya cittas If cittas are counted as 121 total cittas, then they can be reclassified as a) 12 akusala cittas b) 37 kusala cittas ( 17 loki kusala + 20 lokuttara kusala cittas ) c) 52 vipaka cittas ( 32 loki vipaka + 20 lokuttara vipaka cittas ) d) 20 kiriya cittas ------------------- 121 cittas 20 lokuttara kusala cittas are 20 magga cittas and 20 lokuttara vipaka cittas are 20 phala cittas. There are 5 jhanas and when 4 magga cittas arise in the power of 5 jhanas, there have to be 4 >< 5 = 20 magga cittas. By the same token, 4 phala cittas when arise as the result of 4 magga cittas in the vacinity of 5 jhanas will be 20 phala cittas. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39702 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 11:40am Subject: Re: foundation web links Hi Nina, The active ones are currently: DhammaHome.com - www.dhammahome.com - has just been transitioned to a new server. Presumably the main website maintained in association with the foundation. You will find some materials here. I hope that the materials associated with the foundation from www.buddhadhamma.org will eventually get here. Buddha Dhamma Org - www.buddhadhamma.org -This website is currently not promoted as being associated with the foundation because there is no manpower to maintain it. There are still more English Books on this site that dhammahome, but hopefully, this will change in the future. www.dhammastudyandsupport.com - defunct - just a redirect to dhammahome.com. kom ps: I am not currently receiving email from the group. If you have more questions, please email me directly! 39703 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 0:07pm Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) Hi Larry, That is an important point. That is why we have to learn first more about the nama elements and rupa elements. Otherwise we are nowhere! A whole of a person does not arise and fall away. Nina. op 12-12-2004 01:54 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > The only draw back is that nations, chariots, > and persons etc. can't be experienced directly so in that case the > tilakkhana doesn't lead to path consciousness. 39704 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 0:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: latent tendencies. Hi Mike, I like your post but I have just one remark. Latent tendencies do not arise, but perhaps you mean something else here in this context. They condition the arising of akusala cittas. Nina. op 11-12-2004 20:57 schreef m. nease op mlnease@z...: > If you mean that phassa and vedanaa occuring in pa.ticcasamuppaada must > arise with at least latent defilements 39705 From: Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 7:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: latent tendencies. Hi, Nina (and Mike) - In a message dated 12/12/04 3:09:38 PM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: > Hi Mike, > I like your post but I have just one remark. Latent tendencies do not arise, > but perhaps you mean something else here in this context. They condition the > arising of akusala cittas. > Nina. > ============================ Nina, I believe I understand what you mean. On another list I'm engaged in an ongoing discussion of mana as the underlying tendency to sense-of-self. The understanding there is that sense-of-self arises at various points, always conditioned by mana, the core aspect of avijja. Because of that discussion, I'm particularly interested in the matter of underlying tendencies (anusaya). In any case, when you say that underlying tendencies do not arise, I do believe I understand what you mean, but the formulation troubles me a bit. The idea of anything other than nibbana existing but never having arisen troubles me. Might an alternative formulation be that underlying tendencies have no very first arising, but are continually self-replicating (or repeating) until finally uprooted upon arahanthood? With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39706 From: Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 7:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: latent tendencies. In a message dated 12/12/2004 12:24:52 PM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: Nina, I believe I understand what you mean. On another list I'm engaged in an ongoing discussion of mana as the underlying tendency to sense-of-self. The understanding there is that sense-of-self arises at various points, always conditioned by mana, the core aspect of avijja. Because of that discussion, I'm particularly interested in the matter of underlying tendencies (anusaya). In any case, when you say that underlying tendencies do not arise, I do believe I understand what you mean, but the formulation troubles me a bit. The idea of anything other than nibbana existing but never having arisen troubles me. Might an alternative formulation be that underlying tendencies have no very first arising, but are continually self-replicating (or repeating) until finally uprooted upon arahanthood? With metta, Howard Hi Howard, Nina, and Mike I'm assuming (a dangerous endeavor) that Nina means that latent tendencies don't arise "in that instance" because they have already arisen, they are already present, due to previous conditions. I hope Nina didn't mean that they didn't arise at some point. All conditioned things of course are subject to arising and dissolution and are constantly in the process of transforming (albeit sometimes very slowly from our perspective.) TG 39707 From: Egbert Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 1:20pm Subject: To all of Nina Hi Nina, Thank you for your kind words. It is nice to be writing again with you and the group. Only yesterday my first boss rang me (I did an apprenticeship in pipe-organ building with him). We have kept in touch over the years, and he played the organ at both my weddings. He is a very competent musician, he played the closing fugue from Klavieruebung III at my last (and final :-)) wedding. To cut a long story short, he asked if I would be willing to regularly tune the reeds of the organ in the local Anglican cathedral, and I said Yes, Yes, Yes!!!! (can you tell I'm excited :-)(I haven't tuned anything for 15 years, but I don't think the ears forget) Now with regards to Nina and Lodewijk, I'm with Lodewijk, and I will not have you negating Nina away :-) In the dhamma, does not experience arise from the coming together of rupa, nama and sense-base? Perhaps it is too scientific, but sense base does not arise in a vacuum, it also requires many other conditions for its arising. Seeing, hearing, touching, tasting, smelling do not occur without the entire complexity of the nervous system, and the nervous system does not function without other support systems. For me sense-base is only shorthand for the entire body, and the body known as Nina is real enough. I agree with you if you mean that the ego Nina is not a substantial entity. For me, the ego is simply the awareness of conflict, a resultant from the conflicting inputs of a body in a world that both supports and undermines that body. So the body in a conflicting world thinks the story of Nina the actor that negotiates through the conflicts. These thoughts are real, but they have no foundation. Nina, the thought, does not, and cannot, do anything. Sorry for preaching :-) Kind Regards Herman > I spoke to Kh. Sujin about my worry concerning Lodewijk's health I had > during this year. She said: it is only a nama, a kind of thinking. I > disliked this and mentioned later on that it felt like a cold shower. You > have to swallow and speak about something you take to heart and then you > have to hear this. But after considering I found it most helpful. We find > our problems so important and get drowned in the ocean of concepts. > But there is the island of Dhamma. Worry is just a kind of thinking, and it > can be realized as such. > You have problems and everybody has. If you would tell Kh Sujin she would > answer the same: just a kind of thinking, it is conditioned and already > past. Is it not true that we make it very big and important? What she says > is deep, it is wise, it is most effective. > The same when Lodewijk cannot accept: there is no Nina. He finds it clearer > now but he says that some explanations are necessary. Kh Sujin said: Is > seeing Nina, is hearing Nina? To which dhamma does one cling? One only > clings to the name. Bitter medicine! > As to sickness, Lodewijk just read the Sutta about Nakulapitar (S.N. III): > how is the body sick but the mind is not sick. B.T.W. India was very good > for his health, he started eating more. As I said, we shall go again to > India, inspite of the bodily disconfort. > Ph: Thanks Nina. And good luck for your father's birthday concert > preparations. > > 104! > N: Thank you for your thoughtfulness. The dog likes the music so much, and > then he starts to go near me and pushes my music stand, so that the book > falls down. (Hey Herman: Music. I thought of you, and see, there you are. > Nice to see you) > Rehearsing today with my nephews. > Nina. 39708 From: m. nease Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 2:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: latent tendencies. Hi Nina, ----- Original Message ----- > op 11-12-2004 20:57 schreef m. nease op mlnease@z...: > >> If you mean that phassa and vedanaa occuring in pa.ticcasamuppaada must >> arise with at least latent defilements From: "Nina van Gorkom" To: Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2004 12:07 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: latent tendencies. > Hi Mike, > I like your post but I have just one remark. Latent tendencies do not > arise, > but perhaps you mean something else here in this context. > They condition the > arising of akusala cittas. Yes, bad wording--let me refer back to the STA Ch. 5, the Process Free briefly: "(91) To one whose death is near, either at the end of the process consciousnesses or at the ceasing of the existence-continuum, the decease consciousness, constituting the conclusion of the present existence, arises and ceases by way of decease. When that has ceased, immediately after it, taking as its object what has been apprehended in the above manner, a mind understood as 'relinking' by virute of its linking different existences, simply arises and proceeds in the new existence. This mind...is generated by a volitional formation appropriately wrapped in the latent defilement of ignorance and rooted in the latent defilement of craving; it is enfolded in its associated dhammas; and as basis, it is the forerunner of conascent [dhammas]." Commentary "Surely it is said that [the volitional formation] is wrapped in the latent defilement of ignorance, and so on, so how can [ignorance and craving] that are conascent with impulsion {javana} have the nature of latent defilements? This is not a problem. Since they too are designated 'latent defilements' because of being like latent defilements, otherwise neither [ignorance and craving] conascent with the unwholesome kamma nor that conascent with craving for existence could be included with [ignorance and craving] conascent with impulsions close to death. "Ignorance occurring as latent in so far as it has not been abandoned is a latent defilement; by a volitional formation wrapped in--enclosed in--that. "That which has the latent defilement of craving as its root, its basis, causing them to act together is rooted in the latent defilement of craving. "By a volitional formation: by a wholesome or unwholesome kamma--the collection of dhammas, beginning with contact, that are conascent with the kamma, or [the volitional formation] conascent with the impulsions close to death; being generated by that. For craving inclines towards an object whose dangers are concealed by ignorance. The afore mentiond formations, which are considered to be 'projecting formations', project; hence it is said: For those going down [into the realms of misfortune], the [volitions] that are born with the formations of ignorance and craving conceal the dangers of objects, inclining and also projecting [those beings towards them]. For others, the unabandoned [formations of ignorance and craving] create concealment and also the inclination, but the projecting formations here are only wholesome..." So would it be more correct to say that, though latent defilements don't arise with phassa and vedanaa, still phassa and vedanaa don't arise without them? mike 39709 From: kenhowardau Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 3:21pm Subject: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@a... wrote: > In a message dated 12/11/2004 8:49:46 PM Pacific Standard Time, > LBIDD@w... writes: > L: Your family is impermanent, your friends are impermanent, your > mentors are impermanent, your health is impermanent, your wealth is > impermanent, your job is impermanent, your possessions are impermanent, > your entertainment is impermanent, anything you enjoy is impermanent. > These are all conventional realities. Don't you think it would be a good > idea to recognize that they are impermanent? > > Larry > > Hi Larry > > That's exactly right and not only that...the way you state it above is very > often the way the Buddha taught it. Hi Larry and TG, If you explained the question carefully to a six-year-old, he would tell you those things are impermanent. I have never heard anyone claim otherwise. May I ask your views on the profundity of the Buddha's teaching? What is it telling us that we don't already know? Ken H 39710 From: plnao Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 3:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Phra Dhammadharo, Phil, Herman. Hi Nina, and all > N: In India we talked about imitation patience and false patience. Kh. Sujin > remarked that patience is viriya, energy. Patience, khanti, is not a > separate cetasika, but it describes a wholesome quality. It is certainly not > a passive, indolent waiting for sati or an imitation patience. Phil: This is something that Jon mentionned some weeks ago. Patience as energy. It's a helpful way to see it. In any case, there must be heedfulness (appamada) that quality that the Buddha said in at least one sutta is chief to the faculties. There is nothing indolent about being heedful. I guess that "imitation patience" is just sloth and indolence. The energetic patience is related to the results. I think my assertion that many people (and probably most newcomers) to Dhamma are thrown off course by being to attached to results is most definitely true. On the other hand, results with respect to eradicating the kind of gross defilements that lead to transgressions is encouraging, and I think it can be taught in a somehwat prescriptive way to beginners. But the problem is that once progress has been made in one area, there will be conditions for being attached to progress in subtler areas. And that progress is likely to come in the space of lifetimes rather than years. Stress on the more likely. > How difficult to rightly understand what Kh Sujin and also Phra Dhammadharo > said. I am glad you got it. Phil: Sometimes I get it, sometimes there is resistance. It will take time. Reading Samyutta Nikaya on khandas is also always very helpful. It's hard for a thoughtful person to read and reflect in there and not come away with his or her self-view loosened a little. And meditating as well. I am back on the cushion. Spending quality time with my defilements, as I put it. I see how they rise beyond my control. Of course, I can and do see that in daily life as well. Daily life will continue to be where the real action is, so to speak. But vipassana meditation is helpful as a kind of exercise, at the very least. No danger that I will allow harmful expectations to arise related to it. At least I think not. > We first dislike it, we are not ready for it yet, but after considering more > we see the value. Phil: We do, or we don't. I think Abhidhamma and K Sujin are not for everyone. We shouldn't expect them to be for everyone. The Buddha was such a brilliant teacher. He taught according to people's accumulations, as we never tire of repeating. I think I have acumulations for patience. At some point in my mid-20s (20 years ago) I chose a phrase from Matthew as a motto, and it has never left me: "In patience, shall ye possess your soul." Maybe now I would say "In patience, shall you eradicate false notions of your soul" haha In any case, patience is a virtue, as long as it it not used to conceal sloth. > I spoke to Kh. Sujin about my worry concerning Lodewijk's health I had > during this year. She said: it is only a nama, a kind of thinking. I > disliked this and mentioned later on that it felt like a cold shower. Cold showers are unpleasant at the time but leave us refreshed and are known to be good for the health, aren't they? >You > have to swallow and speak about something you take to heart and then you > have to hear this. But after considering I found it most helpful. We find > our problems so important and get drowned in the ocean of concepts. > But there is the island of Dhamma. Worry is just a kind of thinking, and it > can be realized as such. All the stories we create and get caught up in. Yesterday on the subway in Tokyo I saw an advertisement for an energy drink featuring on of my baseball heroes, Ichiro Suzuki! It said "I don't boast about my fatigue" The Japanese for boast is "jiman." "Ji" is self "man" is satisfaction, fullnesss. At work, there are so many students who talk of being tired, or use it as an excuse for not being able to do their homework, etc. As you know, I do it too. I am tired a lot of the time. But everytime I talk about it, I just make it worse. I make a story out of it. I'm not sure if tiredness is a rupa or a nama - Htoo gave me some interesting comments but I'm afraid I can't remember them- but in any case my thinking about it is nama. The worry about a loved one's health is another level of worry, of course. > You have problems and everybody has. If you would tell Kh Sujin she would > answer the same: just a kind of thinking, it is conditioned and already > past. Is it not true that we make it very big and important? What she says > is deep, it is wise, it is most effective. I appreciate hearing it again and again and again and again and again and..... > The same when Lodewijk cannot accept: there is no Nina. He finds it clearer > now but he says that some explanations are necessary. Kh Sujin said: Is > seeing Nina, is hearing Nina? To which dhamma does one cling? One only > clings to the name. Bitter medicine! I remember we talked about this before, after I had that breakthrough insight in which I saw Naomi as dhammas. To be honest, I don't understand why people don't see this more easily. As I said above, if we spend time reflecting on the Buddha's teaching of the khandas, starting with "is form constant or inconstant" and going through feelings, perception, fabrications and consciousness with dukkha and anatta as well, if we just soak in that teaching, how do we come away believing that people are not concepts fabricated by the mind? I still don't understand the controversy, whether we say pannati or not. (It's harder for me to understand that physical objects such as trees are concepts, but that will take more time.) Does that mean that we don't love, treasure, respect people? Of course not! Why should it? It just liberates us from false hopes, false expectations, impossible demands. It frees us to appreciate them more purely in the moment, both are loved ones and acquaintances and strangers. Honestly, I don't understand why that is a problem. But of course if you say to someone who hasn't come into contact with Dhamma that people are just concepts, they will think you are nuts. So be it. As I said above, Abhidhamma is not for everyone, and I'm afraid that applies to Dhamma as a whole. It's healing power is so evident to people that "get it" that we wonder why it hasn't prevailed in the world. It's because of accumulations, or something. I don't know. > As to sickness, Lodewijk just read the Sutta about Nakulapitar (S.N. III): > how is the body sick but the mind is not sick. B.T.W. India was very good > for his health, he started eating more. As I said, we shall go again to > India, inspite of the bodily disconfort. Yes, I like that sutta a lot. It is one of those SN suttas that I was referring to above. "Discern" appears again and again and again in SN. When we discern the true characteristics of the khandas, we are liberated from fear and anxiety. Even at a basic intellectual level, in my opinion. In my case, should I say. Of course the fear and anxiety return again and again. And will. But there are moments of liberation that condition the arising of more to come. That is enough to be very encouraged about, very grateful about. > Ph: Thanks Nina. And good luck for your father's birthday concert > preparations. > > 104! > N: Thank you for your thoughtfulness. The dog likes the music so much, and > then he starts to go near me and pushes my music stand, so that the book > falls down. He must have done something very naughty in a past life! Perhaps he was Mozart. Metta, Phil 39711 From: m. nease Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 4:00pm Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem ofRelations) Hi Ken and Larry, ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Saturday, December 11, 2004 8:45 PM Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem ofRelations) > L: "I agree. I think it is probably good to recognize the impermanence > of conventional realities." > > K: "You could be right, but I don't see why." > > L: Your family is impermanent, your friends are impermanent, your > mentors are impermanent, your health is impermanent, your wealth is > impermanent, your job is impermanent, your possessions are impermanent, > your entertainment is impermanent, anything you enjoy is impermanent. > These are all conventional realities. Don't you think it would be a good > idea to recognize that they are impermanent? I think you're both right in my usual way--that is, vohaara- vs. paramattha-sacca subsume this discrepancy to my mind. In the Lokavipatti Sutta e.g.: Gain/loss, status/disgrace, censure/praise, pleasure/pain: these conditions among human beings are inconstant, impermanent, subject to change. Knowing this, the wise person, mindful, ponders these changing conditions. (TB's translation from http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an08-006.html) Most of the items (dhammas?) here are clearly conceptual, I think, and there are many other examples from the suttas of the conceptual consideration of conceptual objects (various beings and so on) with, I think, the aim of a kind of conceptual insight. The great danger, I think, is in mistaking these conceptual considerations and insights for consideration of and insights into paramattha dhammas--the latter being transformative and the former not. Sorry if I have but one string to my bow lately--I just don't feel that the conventional needs to be the enemy of the 'real' or the best the enemy of the good. mike 39712 From: Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 4:50pm Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) Ken H: "May I ask your views on the profundity of the Buddha's teaching? What is it telling us that we don't already know?" Hi Ken, Regarding impermanence, he says desiring or even valuing anything that is impermanent leads to dukkha, in one way or another, always. I don't think we really know that and probably are a little afraid to know it. It seems almost inhuman. Plus the tactic of rejecting all pleasure usually hides a gigantic desire for release. In this case the desire is for a concept that will never arise [this may not be in the suttas]. In any case, even though impermanence may be obvious, he repeated that message over and over. Whatever is impermanent is dukkha. Whatever is impermanent and dukkha is not self. Larry 39713 From: Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 5:02pm Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem ofRelations) Mike: "Most of the items (dhammas?) here are clearly conceptual, I think, and there are many other examples from the suttas of the conceptual consideration of conceptual objects (various beings and so on) with, I think, the aim of a kind of conceptual insight. The great danger, I think, is in mistaking these conceptual considerations and insights for consideration of and insights into paramattha dhammas--the latter being transformative and the former not." Hi Mike, Transformation is relative. Noticing the impermanence of a touch sensation probably isn't going to transform anyone's values, but if a loved one dies that impermanence makes a big difference. I think the place to look for potential transformation is where we are clinging the most, or the most habitually, whether the object is concept or reality. A good reality to investigate is clinging itself. Larry 39714 From: Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 5:09pm Subject: Vism.XIV,123 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 123. (n) At the end of registration the life-continuum resumes its occurrence. When the [resumed occurrence of the] life-continuum is again interrupted, adverting, etc., occur again, and when the conditions obtain, the consciousness continuity repeats its occurrence as adverting, and next to adverting seeing, etc., according to the law of consciousness, again and again, until the life-continuum of one becoming is exhausted. For the last life-continuum consciousness of all in one becoming is called death (cuti) because of falling (cavanatta) from that [becoming]. So that is of nineteen kinds too [like rebirth-linking and life-continuum]. This is how the occurrence of nineteen kinds of resultant consciousness should be understood as death. 39715 From: Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 0:32pm Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) In a message dated 12/12/2004 3:22:09 PM Pacific Standard Time, kenhowardau@y... writes: L: Your family is impermanent, your friends are impermanent, your > mentors are impermanent, your health is impermanent, your wealth is > impermanent, your job is impermanent, your possessions are impermanent, > your entertainment is impermanent, anything you enjoy is impermanent. > These are all conventional realities. Don't you think it would be a good > idea to recognize that they are impermanent? > > Larry > > Hi Larry > > That's exactly right and not only that...the way you state it above is very > often the way the Buddha taught it. Hi Larry and TG, If you explained the question carefully to a six-year-old, he would tell you those things are impermanent. I have never heard anyone claim otherwise. May I ask your views on the profundity of the Buddha's teaching? What is it telling us that we don't already know? Ken H We may think we understand impermanence, even in a common sense manner, but we don't really. If we really understood it we would be arahats. The reason we don't understand impermanence is because we have a tendency to see things as permanent and bound with essence and substantiality. Although a mind might think it understands that all things are impermanent, the likelihood is that it still is plagued by permanence-view and self-view. Understanding impermanence is not the surface belief that things are impermanent. It is deep awareness of impermanence and of the sorrowful consequences of that condition. Repeatedly and consistently cultivating awareness of the impermanence of states can gradually breakdown misperceptions of permanence-view and self-view. This awareness is needed to detach the mind from clinging and grasping. If a mind understands the significance of impermanence, it won't crave and affliction will not result. The more impermanence is taught regarding whatever object is being considered, the more the mind inclines toward impermanence-view. The "profundity" is not in determining what elements exist or don't exist. The profundity resides in breaking permanence-view, pleasurable-view, and self-view, and overcoming attachment. There are all sorts of methods taught by the Buddha to achieve that...as different methods appeal to different minds inclinations. The statement and question above are what might be expected from a non-Buddhists trying to grapple with their first experiences of the Buddha's teaching. Nothing provided in an e-mail is liable to drive forward the insight needed to resolve the issue in the mind of the questioner. A deep and consistent study of the Sutta Pitaka are needed to provide the potential needed to resolve the issues address above. Otherwise, they may never be understood. Since the Buddha did indeed spend a lot of time teaching the impermanence of what some describe as "conventional realities," I guess one needs to ask -- whether the Buddha was teaching six-year-olds, or whether there is something more to it! TG 39716 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 6:08pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Phra Dhammadharo, Phil, Herman. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "plnao" wrote: > I am back on the cushion. Spending quality time with > my defilements, as I put it. > I see how they rise beyond my control. Of course, I can and do see that in > daily life as well. Daily life > will continue to be where the real action is, so to speak. But vipassana > meditation is helpful as a kind > of exercise, at the very least. ======== Dear Phil, Easy isn't it, just sit on the pillow and have vipassana. Or is it really vipassana? RobertK 39717 From: plnao Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 6:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Phra Dhammadharo, Phil, Herman. Hi Rob > Dear Phil, > Easy isn't it, just sit on the pillow and have vipassana. Or is it > really vipassana? > RobertK Yes, very easy! I had it 11 times this morning and 17 times yesterday! I hear you Rob. I always appreciate your reminders. I hope you saw the mention I made the other day of your wondering why people can't be satisfied with moments of mindfulness. That made a big impression on me. But I am curious to know more about vip meditation. The last time I tried I was so focussed on results that it was a farce. Now I am relaxed and will just see what is up. I've always said that even while I have suspicions that jhanas are not as easy to attain as people say, there is no reason that formal meditation in itself need be seen as a self-driven activity, any more than studying suttas is. I would not return to metta meditation at this time. That still feels unnecessary to me. And I won't be seeking jhanas in this lifetime, unless something very unexpected happens about my lifestyle! Also, now that I have just received my copy of MN and have ordered the SN as well I am in danger of being swamped by reading, reading, reading. Of course reminders from K Sujin and all about realities in the moment help me most of all, but putting down my treasured book and just sitting is good for calming my agitated mind, at the very least. I know the agitation is a reality that I can learn from, but... Panna will let me know if there is any valuable insight arising from the exercise. But I won't press for insight any more than I do in daily life. Anyways, please do keep sending reminders my way. Thanks! Metta, Phil 39718 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 6:47pm Subject: 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' Dear Group, I have been reflecting on the saying that 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' and whether 'Nibbana is Conscious/ness'. I'd be interested to hear what anyone's thoughts are on this subject. The following contains excerpts from "Dimensions of Buddhist Thought" by Francis Story (BPS 1985). We briefly touched on it during the last dhamma discussion weekend at Cooran - but this idea is endemic to many discussion groups. It seems often to be tied to the idea that Nibbana is pure conscious/ness. "To get this statement [Samsara is the same as Nibbana] into perspective, it is necessary to distinguish between the experience of Nibbaana known to the Arahant while he is still living, and the Nibbaana after death. The first is called in Pali, Sa-upaadisesa- nibbaana : Nirvaana with all the components of individualised personality still present. The second is called Anu-paradises- nibbaana. It is Nirvaana without any substratum of personality in the present, and without the possibility of its arising in the future. This is the Nibbaana in which present and future do not exist, since it is free from all conditionality. It is clear, from the descriptions given of the lives of disciples subsequent to their attainment of Arahantship, that although they could induce the Nirvaanic consciousness when ever they wished, they were not, in their ordinary state, exempt from the pains of the flesh. Only their minds remained unaffected. Physically, they suffered from sickness and injury, as all mortals must do. Even the Buddha himself endured much in this way, towards the end of his life. He told Aananda that it was only when he withdrew his consciousness from the physical plane that he could obtain bodily ease. **(Mahaa Parinibbaana Sutta, `Last Days of the Buddha'. The Wheel No. 67/69) Sa-upaadisesa-nibbaana, therefore, is only intermittent release from suffering; as a continual state of consciousness for a living being it would be incompatible with the maintenance of life. Remaining in it constantly, the physical organism would perish. Far from being `one with Sa.msaara', it is the state in which all sa.msaaric experience is suspended, so long as the Arahant remains in it. If he intends to live out his course, he has to emerge from the contemplation of Nirvaana so that he can again function within the modes, and according to the laws, of conditionality. The Nibbaana after death is the same as that which the Arahant is capable of experiencing in life, but it is the absolute and final withdrawal from sa.msaaric conditions. It is in this sense that it becomes `permanent'. As the Buddha taught it, Nibbaana is desirable because it is cessation of births and deaths, and all the suffering they entail. One may live with the intellectual understanding that all existence is anicca, dukkha and anattaa, and one may reach the full interior experience of it while still living; but neither of these is equivalent to that Nibbaana which is the total release from conditioned existence and its necessary suffering. A Bodhisatta is able to continue the round of rebirths while he qualifies himself to become a Supreme Buddha, but only by stopping short of the attainment of Arahantship. He does not experience Nibbaana and Sa.msaara as identical. To him, Nibbaana is certainty because he has confidence; but it is a certainty belonging to the future, not to his present condition and daily activities. It may indeed be said that Sa.msaara contains the potentiality of Nibbaana; but potential states and actual ones should not be confused. Nibbaana in its fullest sense means the complete extinction of Craving, not in one form only, but in all its manifold guises; and where Craving is extinguished, there can be no re-arising of sa.msaaric existence. This is the whole point and essence of the Buddha's doctrine."' Metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 39719 From: Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 3:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' Hi Christine Here are some quotes from the Suttas on the subject of whether Nibbana entails some sort of conscious/ness. My conclusion, from the Suttas, is that Nibbana is the abscence of consciousness. Those with self-view will do anything possible to avoid that conclusion. ;-) As far samsara and nibbana being the same thing? Well, there might be a way in which a 'fine meal' or 'human excrement' might be considered the same thing...but I'd make the effort to dine on the 'fine meal.' ;-) again The Buddha describes the “death resultâ€? of an enlightened (arahat) monk, Ven.Dabba Mallaputta… The body disintegrated, perception ceased, All feelings became cool, Mental activities were calmed, And consciousness came to an end. (The Buddha . . . The Udana & The Itivuttaka, pg. 116, 8.9) “Where consciousness becomes established and comes to growth … I say that is accompanied by sorrow, anguish, and despair.â€? … “Where consciousness does not become established and come to growth…I say that is without sorrow, anguish, and despair.â€? (The Buddha . . . CDB, vol. 1, pg. 600 - 601) “By the utter destruction of delight in existence, By the extinction of perception and consciousness, By the cessation and appeasement of feelings, It is thus, friend, that I know for beings – Emancipation, release, seclusion.â€? (The Buddha . . . CDB, vol. 1, pg. 90) “…the arising, continuation, production, and manifestation of feeling born of eye-contact is the arising of suffering, the continuation of disease, the manifestation of aging and death. The arising, continuation, production, and manifestation of feeling born of ear-contact … of feeling born of nose-contact … of feeling born of tongue-contact … of feeling born of body-contact … of feeling born of mind-contact is the arising of suffering, the continuation of disease, the manifestation of aging and death. The cessation, subsiding, and passing away of feeling born of eye-contact … feeling born of mind-contact is the cessation of suffering, the subsiding of disease, the passing away of aging and death.â€? (The Buddha . . . CDB, vol. 1, pg. 1009) “The topmost achievement is the release-without-grasping, by seeing as it really is the arising and the ceasing, the attraction, the danger, and the escape from the six spheres of contact.â€? [Visual, audible, olfactory, gustatory, tactile, and mental] (The Buddha . . . GS vol. 5, pg. 45) “…cognizance enters into cessation which is the Nibbana principle…â€? (PD, pg. 228 - 229, Treatise on Faculties) “…there is an escape from this whole field of perception.â€? (The Buddha . . . MLDB, pg. 120, The Simile of the Cloth, Vatthupama Sutta, #7) 39720 From: buddhatrue Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 9:01pm Subject: Re: kusala and akusala. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear friend James, > It is good you remark this impression you have of Kh Sujin. Lodewijk said, > quite understandable that you have it. I try my best to answer this. Friend Nina, Thank you for the explanation of the outlook of Kh. Sujin. It seems that I was mistaken in the ideas I had about what she teaches. I was just thinking out loud really and hadn't come to any firm conclusions. I don't know why, I can't quite put my finger on it, but I am still not very impressed by her teaching. Whenever you quote something that she said, or how she responded to a direct question (like her famous, "What do you see now?") I just think to myself, "Oh please, go sell that mojo somewhere else!" ;-)) Anyway, I have gone on too much about her in the past and now, it is time for me to stop. Here is my last word to you on this subject: I don't think you should be so afraid of "atta belief" entering your practice. Doing that is like being afraid of your own shadow! As you move closer to the light (nibbana), and the light is directly overhead, the shadow will be gone. Until then, make peace with it. Metta, James ps. I think you should listen more to Lodewijk than Kh. Sujin. 39721 From: Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 9:54pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' Christine: "I have been reflecting on the saying that 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' and whether 'Nibbana is Conscious/ness'. I'd be interested to hear what anyone's thoughts are on this subject." Hi Christine, The idea that nibbana and samsara are the same comes from Nagarjuna's "Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way" (Mulamadhyamakakarika). That is sort of the conclusion of his argument. For Nagarjuna all understanding of any experience is conceptual. Whatever is known is concept, empty of self-nature (sabhava), non-arising. Samsara is known; nibbana is known. Samsara is concept, nibbana is concept. Nibbana and samsara are the same. This is my interpretation. He didn't use these words or reasons, but he did come to this conclusion. The idea that nibbana is pure consciousness can be found in the Cittamatra (mind-only) school (also called Yogacara). However I don't know of anyone who actually said this. Here the idea is that all there is is consciousness. Consciousness "stuff" is the complete emptiness that is subjectivity, the indescribable, limitless point of your point of view, where you are coming from. All objects are nothing more than a colorful manifestation of this stuff, consciousness. Again, my interpretation. Imo, abhidhamma is not incompatible with either view and there are some who synthesize the two. I think the Buddha was a realist interested in experience. The only way to know what nibbana was for him is to follow the path as he described it. Larry 39722 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 10:05pm Subject: Re: Phra Dhammadharo, Phil, Herman. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "plnao" wrote: > Hi Rob > > > Yes, very easy! I had it 11 times this morning and 17 times yesterday! > > > I hear you Rob. I always appreciate your reminders. I hope > you saw the mention I made the other day of your wondering why people > can't be satisfied with moments of mindfulness. That made a big impression > on me. > > But I am curious to know more about vip meditation. The last time I tried > I was so focussed on results that it was a farce. Now I am relaxed and will > just see what is up. I've always said that even while I have suspicions > that jhanas > are not as easy to attain as people say, there is no reason that formal > meditation > in itself need be seen as a self-driven activity, any more than studying > suttas is. >==================- Dear Phil, I have had these conversations many times over the last 15 years or so. In India with my guide, he went to the Ganges river every morning to do his ritual washing. I asked him about it and he said it is so that he is reminded to be good etc. ect.- "oh yes it doesn't matter I can be reminded anytime, I don't have to do it" but still he seemed attached to me. Or a muslim friend who says bowing to mecca five times a day reminds him of his duties and purifies his mind. And they will all say that they don't have to do such rituals but then ... The most striking was speaking to a Sth American woman at Bodh Gaya who seemed thrilled to hear about the six doors but then apologised because she had to cut our conversation short to do her few thousand prostrations for the day. Here is a quote from a popular book by Venerable Gunaratana. Mindfulness in Plain English. ""One of the most difficult things to learn is that mindfulness is not dependent on any emotional or mental state. .......You don't need to move at a snail's pace to be mindful. You don't even need to be calm. You can be mindful while solving problems in intensive calculus. You can be mindful in the middle of a football scrimmage. You can even be mindful in the midst of a raging fury. Mental and physical activities are no bar to mindfulness. If you find your mind extremely active, then simply observe the nature and degree of that activity. It is just a part of the passing show within.."endquote I find so few people can see this. Anger is just as good an object as pleasant feeling, and yet so many seem to think that vipassana is about sitting quietly trying to be calm. Funnily enough they might also feel relaxed sitting in a hot bath or going for a jog but they wouldn't equate that with vipassana. RobertK 39723 From: kenhowardau Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 11:01pm Subject: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem ofRelations) Mike, I was arguing with Larry over the value of seeing concepts as impermanent. You wrote: --------------- > I think you're both right in my usual way--that is, vohaara- vs. paramattha-sacca subsume this discrepancy to my mind. In the Lokavipatti Sutta e.g.: Gain/loss, status/disgrace, censure/praise, pleasure/pain: these conditions among human beings are inconstant, impermanent, subject to change. Knowing this, the wise person, mindful, ponders these changing conditions. > ---------------- That sounds pretty convincing, but I will continue to argue, if you don't mind. I agree that absolute truth does not contradict conventional truth. For example, knowledge of anicca does not lead people to doubt they will eventually die. But absolute truth goes beyond conventional truth, and it renders it obsolete. For example, with knowledge of anatta we see that death is just one more citta in an endless stream of cittas. With that knowledge, there is no need to think in terms of people dying. ---------------- <. . .> M: > there are many other examples from the suttas of the conceptual consideration of conceptual objects (various beings and so on) with, I think, the aim of a kind of conceptual insight. The great danger, I think, is in mistaking these conceptual considerations and insights for consideration of and insights into paramattha dhammas-- the latter being transformative and the former not. > ----------- Again, is hard to argue with that, so I will resort to nit-picking: Even without ever hearing the Dhamma, a wise man can enjoy the calm, kusala consciousness that sees his own mortality. However, this will never get him out of samsara - the Middle Way is not this kind of kusala. The Buddha described all kinds of kusala and akusala, but he taught *only* the Middle Way. -------------- M: > Sorry if I have but one string to my bow lately--I just don't feel that the conventional needs to be the enemy of the 'real' or the best the enemy of the good. > ---------------- In your case, it isn't. You distinguish between conventional truth and ultimate truth. However, some dsg members are saying that the Buddha described concepts (people, chariots, nations, and so on) as anicca, dukkha and anatta. They are missing the distinction. According to them, the Middle Way is just conventional truth that has become concentrated in some [mystical] way. Thanks for butting in - I hope I haven't cured you of it. :-) Ken H 39724 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 11:11pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 72- Volition/cetanaa (b) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.4 Volition(cetanaa] contd] ***** The Atthasåliní (I, Part IV, Chapter I, 111) states about cetanå that its characteristic is coordinating the associated dhammas (citta and the other cetasikas) on the object and that its function is ‘willing’. We read: -…There is no such thing as volition in the four planes of existence -without the characteristic of coordinating; all volition has it. But the -function of ‘willing’ is only in moral (kusala) and immoral (akusala) -states… It has directing as manifestation. It arises directing -associated states, like the chief disciple, the chief carpenter, etc. who -fulfil their own and others’ duties. The Visuddhimagga (XIV, 135) gives a similar definition (1). The characteristic of cetanå is coordinating. It coordinates the citta and the other cetasikas it accompanies on the object. Citta cognizes the object, it is the leader in knowing the object. *** 1) See also the Dhammasangaùi §5 ***** [Ch.4 Volition(cetanaa) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 39725 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 0:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: AN III - 100 mental misconduct vs. thoughts of ill-will Friend James, I had planned to continue our ‘long time no chat’ discussion last week….anyway here goes.. --- buddhatrue wrote: > Hi there!! Gosh, long time no chat. Well, lucky for me I took the > day off from work. I really like your post because it is very > direct: … Thanks, James. Let me try to keep this one direct too. …. > James: To be aware of one's attachment with detachment? That would > be quite a trick! ;-)) …. S: Well, being aware with attachment would certainly not lead to any guarding of the sense doors would it? Surely, it’s only by knowing and being aware of realities for what they are and developing detachment,that there will be less interest in the ideas about what is seen, heard and so on ? …. >Seriously, I know what you are getting at but > it seems that you are forgetting the defilement of delusion. We are > all suffering from delusion so it isn't always possible to be really > aware of one's defilements. ….. S: Good points. I agree that delusion is there most of the day – whenever there isn’t dana, sila or bhavana, there’s bound to be delusion. However, surely it is the development of awareness of attachment and any other realities with detachment that slowly leads to the ‘piercing’ of delusion. Panna or samma ditthi dispels the darkness of avijja when it arises and it does lead to more panna, wouldn’t you agree? ….. >We take the beautiful for ugly, the > ugly for beautiful, the impermanent for permanent,…etc. Not only > that, in a worldling the defilement of attachment is arising almost > constantly! When is there ever really a moment without attachment? …. S: Quite right. This is why attachment is said to be the ‘teacher and the student’ or the ‘leader and the follower’. We follow it all the time and it follows us all the time. We’re always concerned about the aversion, but forget about all the attachment arising throughout the day and don’t see the danger in it accumulating all the time. …. > As far as what the Buddha taught, he taught that one should purify > the mind by following the Noble Eightfold Path; this would include > cultivating sila, samadhi, and panna. …. S: Agreed. One of the points I was discussing with B.Bodhi was about how at moments of satipatthana, there is higher sila, higher samadhi and higher panna arising together naturally. This is the fivefold path which leads to the eightfold path at moments of enlightenment. The higher sila (adhisiila-sikkhaa) is the guarding of the sense doors. So at moments of satipatthana, there is already such guarding. The same applies to higher samadhi (adhicitta-sikkhaa) which develops along with satipatthana. So when we read in the suttas about how ‘whenever the monk perceives a form with the eye……..etc, he neither adheres to the appearance as a whole, nor to its parts………..restrains his senses’ (as in M 38), it is referring to the development of satipatthana, the development of higher sila, samadhi and panna developing together with detachment, the function of panna, as leader. Let me know if this makes any sense or your understand differently here, James. … > James: Again, I don't think it is possible to know the truth of > one's accumulations. We are all suffering from delusion (ignorance). …. S: Yes, I agree with you. We can just know the truth of our accumulations momentarily – at a moment of understanding which knows attachment or anger arising, for example, we can see the accumulation then and there. We have no idea what accumulations will appear next…..:-/ …. > James: If we knew what `it' (defilements) is really, then we > wouldn't have attachment, aversion, or ignorance. See what I am > getting at? … S: Yes and well said. Somewhere the Buddha says something about if we really saw the danger in the smallest traces of the defilements, we wouldn’t go on accumulating them. ‘If they knew what I know…’ or something along those lines. If we really understood the 4 Noble Truths…. …. > James: This is like saying, "What would be really helpful for the > blind is if they would just see." …. S: Sounds pretty obvious doesn’t it;-) We are the blind, but there is the opportunity to learn to see if there’s not too much dust in our eyes….. …. > James: No, it leads to a greater purification of the mind. Don't do > evil, do only good, and purify the mynd, this is the teaching of all > Buddhas. And what is this "more attachment to the self" mean > really? I asked Nina this also, what is this `self' that you are > saying we are attached to? I don't know any `self'. I can be > attached to food, money, sex, etc., these things exist, but what is > this `self' you keep speaking of? Do you mean the craving for being? …. S: Like now. Do we want to be wiser, smarter, less foolish, less attached? I can’t speak for you, but I know that for myself and others I talk to, that clinging to ‘me' is lurking behind all these wishes, finding oneself important, being concerned for one’s spiritual and material welfare. It doesn’t mean there’s always a wrong idea of self arising, but the attachment or clinging to oneself is far, far more prevalent than we like to admit, I think. Exactly like you said before about attachment and delusion…. And then, behind so many of our spiritual endeavours, there is a wrong idea of self sneaking in so very easily too. Surely, it's better to recognise it when it arises? Without good reminders from friends, our lobha and wrong views can easily take us seriously off-track, I think. …. > Sarah: Did you listen to any of the audio discussion from India?. > > James: No, I have a slow connection so I didn't attempt to download > them. But I think it is a good idea that you have them available! …. S: Thanks for the encouragement. ALL – for anyone like James with a slow connection, we are very happy to send out India MP3s by mail – it’s as simple as ending out Xmas cards (and a lot more useful in our view). Just send me off-list your full name and address for a cut and paste job if you’d still like one. …. > James: Thanks. Glad to know you're keeping an eye on me. Somebody > has to! ;-)) … S: You said it!! ;-)) Btw, I think you were doing a good job in questioning KenO on generosity and the Noble Eightfold Path, (though I understood your point, Ken O. In Cetasikas, we’re now looking at cetana (intention). It arises with all cittas, including all wholesome ones, but that doesn’t make it an Eightfold Path factor, Ken;-). [An interesting point came up about the Paramis in India. K.Sujin was saying there are not only the Bodhisatta paramis, but also pacceka paramis and savaka (follower) paramis too. Still, again, these develop naturally with the development of satipatthana.. No need to say or think “I am developing the paramis’] Thanks for stressing about how it would be a‘cold day in hell’ before I’d urge anyone to do this or that in order to develop wisdom;-). It would be a freezing one before I’d suggest anyone could ‘think’ themselves to enlightenment either. The middle way, as I see it, is in seeing all realities (dhammas) for what they are without any self in the picture at all. Developing panna in order to really be alone without family or friends or companions or a self – seeing elements (dhatus) for what they are, such as seeing, visible object, hearing and sound. That’s why courage is stressed! As Phil said, cold showers are said to be good for the health;-). Actually, I’ve always found suttas like the Migajala Sutta very comforting – I love to read and be reminded about how very alone we are with just the seeing or the hearing or the thinking at this moment. We can follow the truth (sacca) and really understand these conditioned dhammas for what they are instead of looking for any way to find nibbana with an idea of a self. Oops ATTA-alert again - time to finish! I liked your sutta quote from M144: “There is wavering in one who is dependent, there is no wavering in one who is independent; when there is no wavering, there is tranquility; when there is tranquility, there is no bias…’ etc. With the development of vipassana, there is higher tranquility. It is perfected in the anagami who has no more attachment to sensuous objects at all. Eradicated for good. I’ll look forward to your further comments, James. Good to see you around again;-). Metta, Sarah ========= 39726 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 1:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Greetings, new member here. Hi Naresh, --- naresh gurwani wrote: > Yes iam from South America, Curacao, just finding a > way to my life , where in US are you from ... I just checked Curacao out on google - in the Caribbean, looks pretty cool. Do you speak Dutch too? I'm not from the US. Originally I'm from England, but have lived in Hong Kong for the past 20 years and before that in Australia for 3 yrs. From Christine's top 13 for the busiest ever week or so on DSG which you happened to join, let me add for you what I can remember about the others as newcomers do sometimes ask me: Howard: Long Island, New York Nina: The Hague, Netherlands KenO: Singapore, s'times Brunei Hugo: ?, US Phil: Tokyo, Japan. Originally from Canada RobM: Kuala Lumpur. Originally from Canada (Is it those Canadian winters...??) Htoo: ?. Originally from Burma Sarah: see above Larry: ?Boulder, Colorado, US Mike: Seattle, US James: Cairo, Egypt. Originally from Arizona, US Andrew: Outback Queensland, Australia Bhante V: Missouri, US ***** Anyway, different stories, same 6 doorways, same lobha, dosa, moha, same Truths to be known. Metta, Sarah ======== 39727 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 1:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Larry & All, --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > I thought the explanation of pannatti in Abhidhammattasangaha came from > another book in ab. pitaka about different types of people. Sorry, I > don't remember the name. .... I think that all the detail about the different kinds of pannatti is given in the commentary to the Puggalapannatti. The Puggalapannatti (PTS: Designation of Human Types) is one of the texts of the Abhidhamma Pitaka. All the detail given in the Vism note is from this source apparently, clarifying further the content of the Abhidhamma text. The comy is not translated into English, but even the Abhidhamma Pitaka text itself begins with limited classifications of pannatti concerned with the real and unreal and then continues to elaborate on pannatti concerned with people (puggala), following the AN groupings. Hence the tile 'Puggala pannatti'. So when we read in the various texts, such as AN or here about people and things, worldly gains and losses etc, we have to understand that these are mere conceptual terms used as a kind of 'short-hand' to point to a number of different namas and rupas. We're subject to the worldly conditions because we don't clearly understand the 6 worlds for what they are. We are susceptible to praise and blame, gain and loss and so on, because we don't appreciate what kamma and vipaka really are and we follow and are obsessed by our stories and ideas on account of what is seen, heard and so on. Also more detail given in the commentary to Abhidhammatthasangaha which some of us quote from here. ... >In Vism. there is a lot of discrimination of > dhammas with and without sabhava (particular characteristic) and there > are a few instances of the use of "paramattha" mostly from the Mahatika > which is dated no later than 7th cent. .... S: Good points. All the Pitakas are about (paramattha) dhammas. Our lives, everything we find important are in truth, merely these paramattha dhammas or khandhas. Metta, Sarah ====== 39728 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 1:51am Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) Hi T G and Larry, I appreciate these reminders. We are reminded of the Truth all the time in daily life, if we would only pay attention, wise attention. Nina. op 12-12-2004 06:54 schreef TGrand458@a... op TGrand458@a...: > In a message dated 12/11/2004 8:49:46 PM Pacific Standard Time, > LBIDD@w... writes: > L: Your family is impermanent, your friends are impermanent, your > mentors are impermanent, your health is impermanent, your wealth is > impermanent, your job is impermanent, your possessions are impermanent, > your entertainment is impermanent, anything you enjoy is impermanent. > These are all conventional realities. Don't you think it would be a good > idea to recognize that they are impermanent? > Hi Larry > > That's exactly right and not only that...the way you state it above is very often the way the Buddha taught it. 39729 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 1:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: latent tendencies. Hi Howard, op 12-12-2004 21:22 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > In any case, when you say that underlying tendencies do not arise, I > do believe I understand what you mean, but the formulation troubles me a bit. > The idea of anything other than nibbana existing but never having arisen > troubles me. Might an alternative formulation be that underlying tendencies > have no > very first arising, but are continually self-replicating (or repeating) until > finally uprooted upon arahanthood? N: I give some quotes: In the ³Pañcappakaranatthakathå², in the Commentary to the ³Yamaka², the Sixth Book of the Abhidhamma, we read in the section on the latent tendencies (anusaya-våra) and the section on ³possessed of latent tendencies² (sånusaya-våra): "In the section on Œbeing possessed of latent tendencies¹ the Buddha said : ¹Who is with the latent tendency of sense desire, he is possessed of it' . It is just like someone who suffers extremely from the sickness of old age, and so on, and, so long as he is not cured from this sickness, is called a sick person even when illness does not arise. It is the same in the case of someone with defilements who is traversing the round of rebirths whose latent tendencies have not been eradicated by the noble eightfold Path. Even though the latent tendencies do not arise he is called a person who is possessed of the latent tendencies. Thus, concerning such latent tendencies he is possessed with, he finds them quite acceptable. The other words in this section are the same as those in the section on latent tendencies.² Thus we see that there are latent tendencies in each of the cittas that are arising and falling away in succession so long as they have not been eradicated by the noble eightfold Path. 2. The latent tendencies have ³arisen² in the sense of ³having obtained a soil² (bhumiladdhuppanna). This refers to the defilements that cannot yet be eradicated and are present in their own soil. N: The word arisen is also used, but in the meaning as quoted above. See also Nyanponika, Abh Studies, p. 121, 122. Actually, also kamma committed is accumulated from citta to citta and it can produce result when there are conditions. In a similar way, all latent tendencies are like microbes in each citta, even in kusala citta, and accumulated from citta to citta. Nina. 39730 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 1:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ‘Cetasikas' - Volition/cetanaa , Htoo. Dear Htoo, Thank you for bringing up this point. op 12-12-2004 20:16 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > There are 4 kinds of ahara. They are > > 1.kabballikaara ahara ( some spell 'kabballinkara' ) > 2.phassa ahara > 3.manosancetana ahara > 4.vinnaana ahara > > In nama-ahara cetana cetasika is included. But I believe this cetana > is not all cetana. I mean this cetana which is ahara is not cetana > that accompanies any kind of citta. > > This cetana is confined to only 29 cittas. They are 12 akusala > cittas, 8 mahakusala cittas, 5 rupakusala cittas, and 4 arupakusala > cittas ( 12 + 8 + 5 + 4 = 29 cittas ). N: There are different methods of teaching (naya). Ahara: it can be taught according to the method of D.O. or according to the method of Patthana. There is no contradiction, as I said before. Different aspects are highlighted. The Sammaditthi sutta Co, under ahara, teaches ahara according to the method of D.O. and then cetana in 29 cittas are manosancetana ahara, as you said above. In the Patthana, cetana arising with each citta is ahara, conascent nutriment condition, it supports the conascent dhammas. It coordinates their tasks. See Guide to Conditional Relations by Ven. U Narada, p. 57, and p. 113, where this is explained: volition associated with 89 cittas, kusala, akusala and indeterminate, as well as the associated cetasikas and rupa produced by citta and kamma produced rupa at rebirth. Nina. 39731 From: Egbert Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 2:36am Subject: Re: kusala and akusala.Herman butting in Hi James, It's good to be reading your posts. On reading this current one, the following came to mind. I don't know why, I can't quite put my finger on it, > but I am still not very impressed by her teaching. Whenever you > quote something that she said, or how she responded to a direct > question (like her famous, "What do you see now?") I just think to > myself, "Oh please, go sell that mojo somewhere else!" ;-)) Anyway, > I have gone on too much about her in the past and now, it is time > for me to stop. I see "What do you see now?" as a very nice little koan. All answers to the question "What do you see now?" are a contradiction, a nonsense. Because they are all always in terms of the past. In terms of itself only, the present moment is .............. Kind Regards Herman 39732 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 2:37am Subject: [dsg] Re: ‘Cetasikas' - Volition/cetanaa , Htoo. Dear Nina, Thank you very much for your kind explanation that the matter is of different teaching method. I now understand and accept as you said. With Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Htoo, > Thank you for bringing up this point. > op 12-12-2004 20:16 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > > There are 4 kinds of ahara. They are > > > > 1.kabballikaara ahara ( some spell 'kabballinkara' ) > > 2.phassa ahara > > 3.manosancetana ahara > > 4.vinnaana ahara > > > > In nama-ahara cetana cetasika is included. But I believe this cetana > > is not all cetana. I mean this cetana which is ahara is not cetana > > that accompanies any kind of citta. > > > > This cetana is confined to only 29 cittas. They are 12 akusala > > cittas, 8 mahakusala cittas, 5 rupakusala cittas, and 4 arupakusala > > cittas ( 12 + 8 + 5 + 4 = 29 cittas ). > N: There are different methods of teaching (naya). Ahara: it can be taught > according to the method of D.O. or according to the method of Patthana. > There is no contradiction, as I said before. Different aspects are > highlighted. > The Sammaditthi sutta Co, under ahara, teaches ahara according to the method > of D.O. and then cetana in 29 cittas are manosancetana ahara, as you said > above. > In the Patthana, cetana arising with each citta is ahara, conascent > nutriment condition, it supports the conascent dhammas. It coordinates their > tasks. See Guide to Conditional Relations by Ven. U Narada, p. 57, and p. > 113, where this is explained: volition associated with 89 cittas, kusala, > akusala and indeterminate, as well as the associated cetasikas and rupa > produced by citta and kamma produced rupa at rebirth. > Nina. 39733 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 3:28am Subject: Dhamma Thread (174) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 89 cittas or 89 states of mind, or 89 mental states or 89 consciousness. Or there are 121 cittas or 121 consciousness in total. There are many classifications on these cittas. First we discussed on cittas with different vedana or feeling. That is classification of cittas depending on vedana or feeling. After that we moved to classification citta depending on hetu or root. The third classification of cittas that we discussed is classification of citta depending on jati or origin or kind of citta or kind of dhamma. Now we are discussing another classification of citta. This 4th classification depends on realm of consciousness or depends on bhumi of cittas or consciousness. There are 4 realms of consciousness. They are 1. 54 kamavacara cittas 2. 15 rupavacara cittas 3. 12 arupavacara cittas 4. 8 lokuttara cittas ----------------- 89 total cittas When magga cittas arise in the vicinity of 5 jhanas, then there will be 40 lokuttara cittas and total cittas will be 121 cittas. They are 1. 54 kamavacara cittas 2. 15 rupavacara cittas 3. 12 arupavacara cittas 4. 40 lokkuttara cittas. a) Kamavacara cittas Kama are dhammas related to 5 senses of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and their implications. Avacara means 'frequently arising. Kama in kamavacara means 'kama bhumi' and so kamavacara cittas are cittas that frequently arise in kama bhumi. But they can still arise in rupa brahma bhumi and arupa brahma bhumi even though not all 54 cittas are possible to arise. Kamavacara cittas are 1. 12 akusala cittas ( 8 lobha citta, 2 dosa citas, 2 moha cittas ) somanassa/upekkha 2>< with ditthi/without>< asankhara/sasankhara 2>< 2>< 2 = 8 lobha cittas. 2 dosa cittas are asankharika and sasankharika. 2 moha cittas are 1.vicikiccha or doubt/suspicision, 2.uddhacca 8 + 2 + 2 = 12 akusala cittas 2. 15 ahetuka vipaka cittas ( 7 akusala vipaka and 8 kusala vipaka ) 5 sense-consciousness of akusala vipaka ( 5 pancavinana ) 1 receiving-consciousness of akusala vipaka ( 1 sampaticchana citta ) 1 investigating-consciousness of akusala vipaka( 1 santirana citta ) --- 7 cittas and the same name with kusala vipaka cittas so there are 7 ahetuka kusala vipaka citta and there is an extra citta called somanassa santirana citta. So there are 8 ahetuka kusala vipaka cittas. 7 + 8 = 15 ahetuka vipaka cittas 3. 3 ahetuka kiriya cittas 1. 1 pancadvaravajjana citta 2. 1 manodvaravajjana citta 3. 1 hasituppada citta ------ 3 ahetuka kiriya cittas 4. 24 kama sobhana cittas These are beautiful consciousness because there are beautiful roots like alobha, adosa and amoha in these 24 cittas. 1. 8 mahakusala cittas 2. 8 mahavipaka cittas 3. 8 mahakiriya cittas ---------------- 24 kama sobhana cittas They each have 8 cittas because there are 3 alternatives that is somanassa or upekkha 2>< nana sampayutta or vippayutta2>< asankarika or sasankharika 2. So 2>< 2>< 2= 8 cittas. So kamavacara cittas are 12 akusala, 15 ahetuka vipaka, 3 ahetuka kiriya, 24 kama sobhana and altogether 12 + 15 + 3 + 24 = 54 kamavacara cittas. b) 15 rupavacara cittas 1. 5 rupakusala cittas ( when in rupa jhana javana of any being ) 2. 5 rupavipaka cittas ( when in bhavanga cittas of rupa brahmas ) 3. 5 rupakiriya cittas ( when in rupa jhana javana of arahats ) ----------- 15 rupavacara cittas [ 5 are 5 jhanas ] Rupavipaka cittas may also be patisandhi citta or cuti citta in rupa brahmas. Rupakiriya cittas may be in any arahats. This means arahats may be ( mostly ) human beings , arahata devas, arahatta rupa brahmas and arahatta arupa brahmas. c) 12 arupavacara cittas 1. 4 arupakusala cittas (when in arupa jhana javana of any being) 2. 4 arupavipaka cittas (when in bhavanga of arupa brahmas ) 3. 4 arupakiriya cittas ( when in arupa jhana javana of arahats ) ------------------ 12 arupavacara cittas [ 4 are 4 arupa jhanas ] Arupavipaka cittas may also be patisandhi or cuti cittas of arupa brahmas. Arupakiriya cittas are may arise in any arahats while in arupa jhana javana. ANy arahat means 1. human arahat, 2. deva arahat, 3. rupa brahma arahat, and 4.arupabrahma arahat. d) 8 lokuttara cittas 1. 4 lokuttara kusala cittas ( 4 magga cittas ) 2. 4 lokuttara phala cittas ( 4 phala cittas ) ---------------------- 8 lokuttara cittas Lokuttara cittas are supramundane consciousness. They are nothing to do with mundane things. Their object is nibbana and they are the highest and pure cittas ever exist. Magga cittas each arise ONLY ONCE in the whole samsara and that particular magga citta is immediately followed by respective phala citta which is lokuttara vipaka cittas. This is known as 'Akaliko'. This is one of attributes of The Dhamma. The result comes at once and there is no delay. So depending on realms of citta there are a) 54 kamavacara cittas b) 15 rupavacara cittas c) 12 arupavacara cittas d) 8 lokuttara cittas ------- 89 total cittas These are realms of citta. These are not realms of beings. So kamavacara cittas may still arise in other bhumi of beings apart from kama bhumi. Rupavacara cittas can also arise in manussa bhumi or human realm and deva realms. Arupavacara cittas can also arise in manussa bhumi or human realm, deva realms and rupa brahma realms apart from arupa brahma bhumi. If magga cittas arise in the vicinity of 5 jhanas with the power of those jhana then 8 lokuttara cittas may be counted as ( 8 >< 5 jhana ) 40 lokuttara cittas. So there will be 121 total cittas and they are 1. 54 kamavacara cittas 2. 15 rupavacara cittas 3. 12 arupavacara cittas 4. 40 lokuttara cittas ------------ 121 total cittas Here PLEASE BE CAREFUL. 40 lokuttara cittas are all lokuttara cittas. They are not mundane consciousness or they are not loki cittas. 15 rupavacara cittas and 12 arupavacara cittas are majjhima cittas or middle consciousness because they are in the middle of kamavacara cittas and lokuttara cittas. These cittas in total 27 ( 15 + 12 ) are called mahaggata cittas. They are not kamavacara cittas. They are not lokuttara cittas. So they are not part of Noble Eightfold Path. By the same token 54 kamavacara cittas are not part of Noble Eightfold Path. They are kama cittas. Noble Eightfold Path is there in 8 lokuttara cittas or there in 40 lokuttara cittas and no other cittas have Noble Eightfold Path. But there may be pre-Path way like kamavacara mahakusala cittas. 27 mahaggata cittas do have their own object and they will never take nibbana as their object. Nibbana is the ONLY OBJECT of 8 lokuttara cittas or 40 lokuttara cittas. Nibbana is the ONLY OBJECT of them. Because these lokuttara cittas can never take other objects as their object. Kama dhammas like seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and thinking on these cannot be the object of lokuttara cittas. The object of mahaggata cittas cannot be the object of lokuttara cittas. So 27 jhana cittas are not lokuttata cittas and they can never take nibbana as their object. When realms of citta or consciousness are not well understood, people always argue on Dhamma. They may have a good source, a good evidence, a good support for their materials. But finally they fail to realize The Dhamma because of misunderstanding on these realms of cittas. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39734 From: jwromeijn Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 3:36am Subject: Re: 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > > Dear Group, > > I have been reflecting on the saying that 'Samsara and Nibbana are > the same' and whether 'Nibbana is Conscious/ness'. I'd be interested > to hear what anyone's thoughts are on this subject. ..... Dear Christine A good theme. To me the first question is: "is the statement Nibanna = Samsara correct in the context of Theravada, of the Pali Canon ?" I can not proof it with quotes from the Canon, but I think the answer must be: NO It is a typical Mahayana-statement. I like the "Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way" of Nagarjuna but his statement Nirvana = Samsara gives me the most difficulties; primary to understand what is meant, to imagine something with it; but till now it are only words to me, a kind of Mahayana-mantra. Or even it's a way of mocking the socalled Hinayana obsession to become a arahat as quick as possible and out of the cyclus of samsara. Still the second question is: is this statement true, even if it is not Theravada, because that is a possibility to me. To put it more subjective: is this statement usefull to me in the stage of this moment of my buddhistic path ? Maybe that this is real your question. Of course you can only answer that yourself, but I can say some about it. So in that case the statement must have a soteriological effect, perhaps in the way Larry describes. To me it has no effect on this moment. Other (Mahayana) statements like the Heart Sutra do me more. I think TG is right in saying that Nibanna is not consciousness: Nibanna can (for us, not-arahats) only been explained in negative statements: not this, not that etc. And samasara is not negatable (if this is a correct engish word). The (Yogacara) opinion, Larry mentions it, that all there is is consciousness: I don't agree with it. a It's not the same as nibanna = samasara b It's not Tharavada: rupa is not consciousness Conclusion: I'm interested in the results of your contemplating this statement. Metta Joop 39735 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 4:13am Subject: Dhamma Thread (175) Dear Dhamma Friends, We have discussed on different classifications of citta. We have talked on vedana classification or 'citta with different feelings'. We have discussed on hetu classification or 'citta without root and cittas with different combinations of root. Then we went over discussion of classification of citta depending on kinds of Dhamma or jati. After that we talked on classification of citta depending on realms of citta and some details have been discussed. Now before we move to another classification, let us have a talk on functions of citta. Sabbe dhamma anatta. There is no self. This may be known by just theoretical learning if not still realized. Sabbe sankhara anicca. There is no permanent sankhara dhammas. There are citta, cetasika and rupa as sankhara dhamma. In a life as we know, there are many cittas happen and many rupa arise and fall away in connection with these cittas. Actually there is no life at all. But conventioanlly everyone knows what a life is. Patisandhi citta determines what a being is. Actually there is no being at all. So in a life as we know, the starting point is patisandhi citta. The end of this whole life is cuti citta. In between are cittas of different kinds. Now we are going to count each function of citta starting from patisandhi citta to finishing with cuti citta. We will leave cittas with similar function. There are 14 kinds of function of citta. 1. patisandhi kicca or 'linking function' 2. bhavanga kicca or 'life-continuum function' 3. avajjana kicca or 'adverting function' 4. dassana kicca or 'seeing function' 5. savana kicca or 'hearing function' 6. ghayana kicca or 'smelling function' 7. sayana kicca or 'tasting function' 8. phusana kicca or 'touching function' 9. sampaticchana kicca or 'receiving function' 10.santirana kicca or 'investigating function' 11.votthapana kicca or 'determining function' 12.javana kicca or 'mental impulsion function' 13.tadarammana kicca or 'retention function' 14.cuti kicca or 'death function' A life starts with patisandhi citta. That citta does the job of linking. That life ends with cuti citta. That cuti citta does the job of dying or death. In between are many many many cittas doing different functions. function 2 to function 13 are different cittas doing different jobs. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39736 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 4:24am Subject: Dhamma Thread (176) Dear Dhamma Friends, In a life, the earliest event is arising of patisandhi citta and okkantikkama rupas or patisandhi kammaja rupas. Kammaja means 'generated by kamma'. Okkantikkama means 'rebirth'. The earliest event is arising of patisandhi citta and patisandhi rupas. As we are discussing on classification of citta and now currently on functions of citta, we will not discussing on rupa at the moment. This patisandhi citta is immediately followed by bhavanga cittas infinitely. So the first function is patisandhi kicca or linking function. This linking is linkage between the cuti citta of previous life and the first bhavanga citta of this life. The 2nd function is bhavanga kicca or life-continuum. When there is no specific object to attend or not able to attend those objects, then citta has to arise as bhavanga citta. There are still kamma. There is no possibility of vithi citta or conscious mind and then citta has to arise as life-continueing consciousness and this is called bhavanga citta. In between patisandhi citta and cuti citta, if there is no vithi citta arise, then as there are still kamma, citta has to arise as bhavanga citta one after another limitlessly. The third function is avajjana kicca or adverting function. This function will be discussed in the coming posts. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39737 From: m. nease Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 6:17am Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The ProblemofRelations) Hi Larry, ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2004 5:02 PM Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The ProblemofRelations) > Transformation is relative. Noticing the impermanence of a touch > sensation probably isn't going to transform anyone's values, but if a > loved one dies that impermanence makes a big difference. I think the > place to look for potential transformation is where we are clinging the > most, or the most habitually, whether the object is concept or reality. > A good reality to investigate is clinging itself. Agreed--anything that leads to consideration of present attachment can be a good condition. Of course the transformation I meant was that of satipa.t.thaana and magga/phala. Any transformation short of these is illusory I think--though even conceptualization can lead to wise attention, heedfulness and so on. mike 39738 From: plnao Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 7:07am Subject: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi James, and all I was intending to post something about this, so this gives me a good chance. > Whenever you > quote something that she said, or how she responded to a direct > question (like her famous, "What do you see now?") I just think to > myself, "Oh please, go sell that mojo somewhere else!" ;-)) There is a difference between "is there seeing now?" (which is the question K Sujin asks) and "what do you see now?" which I've never come across her asking but is still a good question. This is just my hunch, but I think the reason she asks "is there seeing now?" is because it is the sense we are most likely to take for granted. In fact, according to both Abhidhamma and the Suttanta (think of that monk who "stops at seeing") seeing as pure consciousness is a lot harder to experience than we think. I've had more confirmations of this recently. I mentioned a few days back about the time that I "saw" a woman while I was thinking of something else. And since posting that, I've noticed it several more times. I'll be thinking about something, walking through a train station or something, and will find that my eyes have locked on a woman. Conventionally, at that moment, one would say "I see a woman" and perhaps you would say that. In fact, the seeing has finished. Why do I find that I am looking at a woman? That I "see" a woman, that my eyes have locked on her while I am thinking of something else. Why don't I have this experience with businessmen? Or trash cans? It is because my mind is not interested in them. It is because my mind has already proliferated about the woman, before I "see" her in the conventional sense. The mind is constantly getting visual information, sanna is constantly doing its work, and this is going on all over the place, all the time. But why is it the woman and not the trash can or the businessman that I keep finding that my eyes have locked on? This is due to conditions, accumulations - natural decisive support condition, or something like that. It is due to what is going on through the mind door, not "seeing." The seeing is done. Conventionally, we would say "I see a woman." But surely you can see it's not so simple. I think that's why K Sujin asks "is there seeing now?" The answer is very likely "no", and being able to answer "no" is evidence of deepening insight. I encourage you to keep an open mind and ask yourself that question now and then. It might be the question that leads to your Road to Damascus Moment re Abhidhamma! (I see it coming, James.....) Metta Phil 39739 From: Ken O Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 8:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: latent tendencies. Hi Mike Vedana and phassa also arise during kiriya cittas of Arahants. My opinion and not of the commentary, the effect of latency could be recognise with the arising of the akusala roots and not the other type of cetasikas. Other than it is dormant, even with kamma. It is the two roots that conditioned kamma to conditioned rebirth Ken O 39740 From: Ken O Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 8:20am Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem ofRelations) Hi Larry and Rob M In the Dispeller of Delusion, I recalled it under the aggregates, in my own words the seeing of dhammas in terms of elements will help us to understand "anattaness". I cannot give you the full quotes as now I am in overseas and will not be back after Christmas Ken O 39741 From: Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 3:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: latent tendencies. Hi, Nina - In a message dated 12/13/04 4:55:00 AM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > op 12-12-2004 21:22 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > > >In any case, when you say that underlying tendencies do not arise, I > >do believe I understand what you mean, but the formulation troubles me a > bit. > >The idea of anything other than nibbana existing but never having arisen > >troubles me. Might an alternative formulation be that underlying tendencies > >have no > >very first arising, but are continually self-replicating (or repeating) > until > >finally uprooted upon arahanthood? > N: I give some quotes: > In the ³Pañcappakaranatthakathå², in the Commentary to the ³Yamaka², the > Sixth Book of the Abhidhamma, we read in the section on the latent > tendencies (anusaya-vÃ¥ra) and the section on ³possessed of latent > tendencies² (sÃ¥nusaya-vÃ¥ra): > > "In the section on Å’being possessed of latent tendencies¹ the Buddha said : > ¹Who is with the latent tendency of sense desire, he is possessed of it' . > It is just like someone who suffers extremely from the sickness of old age, > and so on, and, so long as he is not cured from this sickness, is called a > sick person even when illness does not arise. > It is the same in the case of someone with defilements who is traversing > the round of rebirths whose latent tendencies have not been eradicated by > the noble eightfold Path. Even though the latent tendencies do not arise he > is called a person who is possessed of the latent tendencies. Thus, > concerning such latent tendencies he is possessed with, he finds them quite > acceptable. > The other words in this section are the same as those in the section on > latent tendencies.² > > Thus we see that there are latent tendencies in each of the cittas that are > arising and falling away in succession so long as they have not been > eradicated by the noble eightfold Path. > > 2. The latent tendencies have ³arisen² in the sense of ³having obtained a > soil² > (bhumiladdhuppanna). This refers to the defilements that cannot yet be > eradicated and are present in their own soil. > N: The word arisen is also used, but in the meaning as quoted above. > See also Nyanponika, Abh Studies, p. 121, 122. > Actually, also kamma committed is accumulated from citta to citta and it can > produce result when there are conditions. In a similar way, all latent > tendencies are like microbes in each citta, even in kusala citta, and > accumulated from citta to citta. > Nina. > ====================== I thank you for the foregoing, but it just doesn't answer my question or solve my problem. From time to time Abhidhammic material and commentarial material is amazingly vague, amazingly fuzzy. And that seems to happen at critical points. ;-) Some things, not so terribly important, such as how many mind-moments can pass during the course of a single rupa - I recall that 17 is the magic number? - are extraordinarily precise, but other very important things such as the precise nature of latent tendencies and the apparent sort of permanence to them, are quite vague. As phenomena that truly exist, and latent tendencies are certainly such, and being other than nibbana, they should be subject to the moment-to-moment arising and ceasing that all other such realities are subject to. Of course, if anusaya are merely pa~n~natti, well, that is a different story. But then, how do they cease? For that matter, they don't ever exist at all according to Abhidhamma. If one were to say that anusaya are deep-seated cetasikas that may be strengthened and weakened, but otherwise tenaciously replicate themselves from moment to moment, and that manifest as outflowings, that would be an explanation that is sufficiently detailed and credible for me to "buy". But apparently this is not the "story", and there doesn't seem to be a story that has much clarity to it. I'm not "blaming" you, Nina. You are incredibly knowledgeable with regard to the tipitaka and commentaries, and you faithfully report what seems to be there. There is no way I could possibly glean this information except from such a wonderful and generous source as you, and I greatly appreciate your assistance. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39742 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 11:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: latent tendencies. Hi Mike, At times the T.A. transl is very hard to read. About arising of latent tendencies: this is also misunderstood, seems like nibbana that does not arise. Of course not. Say, lobha-mulacitta arises and then falls away, and then, although the citta is no longer there, the sense desire continues on as a latent tendency, and is accumulated from one citta to the next. See my quotes to Howard. It increases ever more. More lobha arises, and is then accumulated, etc. This accumulated latent tendency of lobha conditions the arising of lobha-mulacitta again. A vicious circle. Nina. op 12-12-2004 23:21 schreef m. nease op mlnease@z...: > So would it be more correct to say that, though latent defilements don't > arise with phassa and vedanaa, still phassa and vedanaa don't arise without > them? 39743 From: Egbert Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 1:41pm Subject: Re: Phra Dhammadharo, Phil, Herman. Hi RobK, I hope you are well. Seing as my name is in the subject, I thought I'd chip in :-) I found it an interesting quote from Venerable Gunaratana. > Here is a quote from a popular book by Venerable Gunaratana. > Mindfulness in Plain English. > ""One of the most difficult things to learn is that mindfulness > is not dependent on any emotional or mental state. > .......You don't need to move at a snail's pace to be mindful. > You don't even need to be calm. You can be mindful while solving > problems in intensive calculus. You can be mindful in the middle > of a football scrimmage. You can even be mindful in the midst of > a raging fury. Mental and physical activities are no bar to > mindfulness. If you find your mind extremely active, then simply > observe the nature and degree of that activity. It is just a > part of the passing show within.."endquote > My take on this is that at a moment of mindfullness there is no sense of "I am doing this" or "I am doing that" or even "doing this" or "doing that". There is no sense of noting or identifaction or classification. Whatever activity seems to be taking place would only appear so to a third-party observer. Am I correct in this, or am I confusing mindfullness with something else? Thanks and Kind Regards Herman 39744 From: plnao Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 3:22pm Subject: Re: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi all > Phil I think that's why K Sujin asks "is there seeing now?" The answer is very > likely "no", and being able > to answer "no" is evidence of deepening insight. Thinking afterwards, I would add that yes, of course, there is seeing now but we are unaware of it. In almost all cases, what we take to be seeing something is actually *looking at.* (Quite often at work I have opportunities to teach the difference between "see" and "look at" , as well as "hear" and "listen to") I would say that a lot of what we take to be seeing is more like looking at, directed by the mind that has already proliferated in a way in response to the visual information, conditioned by natural decisive support conditioned, or accumulations in the citta, or with the cittas, or whatever. And the value of knowing this is, of course, that it points yet again at the lack of self that can steer citta processess in a desired direction. Yet more evidence of the overwhelming influence of conditions. More reason, therefore, to feel helpless about things.? No - more reason to feel gratitude to the Buddha who laid out the workings of mind, more reason to have faith that by following the Buddha's teaching panna can be cultivated, the pannna that will conceivably in this lifetime but more likely in a lifetime to come give rise to the cessation of proliferation. (ie " the monk stops at seeing.") Metta, Phil 39745 From: plnao Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 3:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Phra Dhammadharo, Phil, Herman. Hi Rob K, and all > Dear Phil, > I have had these conversations many times over the last 15 years or > so. In India with my guide, he went to the Ganges river every > morning to do his ritual washing. I asked him about it and he said > it is so that he is reminded to be good etc. ect.- "oh yes it > doesn't matter I can be reminded anytime, I don't have to do it" but > still he seemed attached to me. > Or a muslim friend who says bowing to mecca five times a day reminds > him of his duties and purifies his mind. > And they will all say that they don't have to do such rituals but > then ... Ah, but we are interested in the workings of the mind, in proliferation, in the way the roots conditions condition our thought processess. No matter what one thinks of vipassana meditation and the risk of becoming attached to it in an unwholesome way, it cannot be denied that it is directly related to seeing into mind. When I meditated in the past, it was all so ritualistic. I had my altar, and my little Buddha (actually a Filipino rice god, but it felt close) and candles and incense. I got into a full lotus and bore down in a such a serious way. Now it is much more relaxed. I'm already sitting on a cushion anyway, because it's a Japanese room, and as you know that's the way we sit whether we're watching TV or whatever. I'm already sitting cross-legged, because that's the way I always sit. I do full lotus if I do yoga, but doing it for vip makes me feel that I am too keen on technique, to keen for results, so I jsut sit with my legs crossed., the way I'm already sitting. I have my coffee, I have my suttas, and at some point, without deciding when, I put down the book and start doing some mindfulness exercises. I don't wait until there's nobody home, the way I used to. This morning Naomi was puttering in the kitchen, making our lunchboxes for the day, and at one point she came in to show me the results. There wasn't a hint of irritation about that. I'm just not that attached to these exercises. We'll see if I get into them in a way that is more likely to lead to attachment. I think it's important that the gap between the way one meditates and one's daily life is not too wide. There's no big gap there for me. It's pretty much the same thing I do on the train. What will make it helpful for me now is to condition awareness of when I am thinking too much. I am so thrilled by the deep Dhamma I continue to find in the Suttanta that I don't stop thinking about it all day long. That has got to stop. And this will help, I suspect. I found a good quote, from Einstein : "The level of thinking that gets one into trouble is insufficient to get one out of it." That certainly applies to the way I'm studying suttas these days. I need guidance from the Buddha to be aware of thinking that threatens to sweep me away into what Nina calls "the ocean of concepts." I've said it before and I'll say it again that I think cultivating panna without resorting to formal meditation is incredibly courageous and indicates a degree of patience that few people are capable of. I think the way of practice taught by K Sujin and advocated by Nina and you and others is the purest way of Dhamma I have ever come across. How easy it is to leap out after comforting ways of practice. But you don't. I really respect that. But I'm aware of some mental imbalances that I want to sort out in a more focused way. I think there is room for that for beginners. The danger is getting attached to these practices and not being able to shed them when they are no longer needed. So the Einstein quote above could apply to meditation as well - "the level of meditation that gets one into trouble is insuffificient to get one out of it." Yes, that could definitely be true. > I find so few people can see this. Anger is just as good an object > as pleasant feeling, and yet so many seem to think that vipassana is > about sitting quietly trying to be calm. As you know if you have been reading my posts, I am well aware of this. All my references to staying with anger instead of lunigng away towards calming methods. But there are benefits to calm as well. I referred in the past to a swimming metaphor. Practicing swimming in a pool, in calm waters, helps us be better swimmers when we swim in open water. We could go out to sea and get battered and tossed around by the waves and eventually fall into a skillful stroke. That is a very courageous way to go about it. Practicing one's strokes first in an indoor pool isn't as courageous but it may lead to a faster arising of skill. > Funnily enough they might also feel relaxed sitting in a hot bath or > going for a jog but they wouldn't equate that with vipassana. I would. Daily life is what it's all about. Metta, Phil 39746 From: Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 4:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Sarah, Thanks for the background info in 'concept' in the abhidhamma. I brought it up because I thought Rob M. was going to research it. But, as often happens when someone thinks too much about concept, he went mad and gave up;-) Larry 39747 From: Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 11:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' In a message dated 12/12/2004 9:59:40 PM Pacific Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: Hi Christine, For Nagarjuna all understanding of any experience is conceptual. Whatever is known is concept, empty of self-nature (sabhava), non-arising. Samsara is known; nibbana is known. Samsara is concept, nibbana is concept. Nibbana and samsara are the same. This is my interpretation. He didn't use these words or reasons, but he did come to this conclusion. Hi Larry and Christine, I'm pretty rusty on my Nagarjuna, but my recollection was that Nagarjuna was a pure "anti-conceptualist." His teaching was to show that concepts are completely false. The idea was, therefore, to surpass conceptual thinking. Nagarjuna's thinking was basically the foundation for much if not all of Mahayana and especially Zen. TG 39748 From: Antony Woods Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:15pm Subject: Re: 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' Dear Christine, Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote: "The Mahayana schools, despite their great differences, concur in upholding a thesis that, from the Theravada point of view, borders on the outrageous. This is the claim that there is no ultimate difference between samsara and Nirvana, defilement and purity, ignorance and enlightenment. For the Mahayana, the enlightenment which the Buddhist path is designed to awaken consists precisely in the realization of this non-dualistic perspective." and: "Thus the Theravada makes the antithesis of samsara and Nibbana the starting point of the entire quest for deliverance. Even more, it treats this antithesis as determinative of the final goal, which is precisely the transcendence of samsara and the attainment of liberation in Nibbana. Where Theravada differs significantly from the Mahayana schools, which also start with the duality of samsara and Nirvana, is in its refusal to regard this polarity as a mere preparatory lesson tailored for those with blunt faculties, to be eventually superseded by some higher realization of non-duality. From the standpoint of the Pali Suttas, even for the Buddha and the arahants suffering and its cessation, samsara and Nibbana, remain distinct." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/news/essay27.html Sorry about overquoting sometimes, it's just that I don't have anything to add to Bhikkhu Bodhi's analysis. May you be well and happy, Antony. 39749 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 6:32pm Subject: Re: Phra Dhammadharo, Phil, Herman. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Egbert" wrote: > > Hi RobK, > > I hope you are well. > > Seing as my name is in the subject, I thought I'd chip in :-) > > I found it an interesting quote from Venerable Gunaratana. > > > Here is a quote from a popular book by Venerable Gunaratana. > > Mindfulness in Plain English. > > ""One of the most difficult things to learn is that mindfulness > > is not dependent on any emotional or mental state. > > .......You don't need to move at a snail's pace to be mindful. > > You don't even need to be calm. You can be mindful while solving > > problems in intensive calculus. You can be mindful in the middle > > of a football scrimmage. You can even be mindful in the midst of > > a raging fury. Mental and physical activities are no bar to > > mindfulness. If you find your mind extremely active, then simply > > observe the nature and degree of that activity. It is just a > > part of the passing show within.."endquote > > > > My take on this is that at a moment of mindfullness there is no > sense of "I am doing this" or "I am doing that" or even "doing this" > or "doing that". There is no sense of noting or identifaction or > classification. Whatever activity seems to be taking place would > only appear so to a third-party observer. Am I correct in this, or > am I confusing mindfullness with something else? > >================= Dear Herman, In the satipatthana sutta commentary it stresses that the type of mindfulness the Buddha meant was one that is associated with wisdom, sati-sampajanna. And especially the satipatthana sutta is about non- delusion: "Within, it is said, there certainly is no self or soul which looks straight on or looks away from the front. Still, at the arising of the thought "I shall look straight on," and with that thought the process of oscillation (vayo dhatu) originating from mind, [citta samutthana] bringing into being bodily expression [viññatti] arises. Thus owing to the diffusion of the process of oscillation born of mental activity [cittakiriyavayodhatu vipphara], the lower eyelid goes down and the upper eyelid goes up. Surely there is no one who opens with a contrivance. Thereupon, eye-consciousness arises fulfilling the function of sight [tato cakkhu viññanam dassana kiccam sadhentam uppajjati], it is said. Clear comprehension of this kind here is indeed called the clear comprehension of non-delusion [evam sampajananam panettha asammoha sampajaññam nama]. Further, clear comprehension of non- delusion should be also understood, here, through accurate knowledge of the root (mula pariñña), through the casual state (agantuka bhava) and through the temporary state [tavakalika bhava]. First (is the consideration) by way of the accurate knowledge of the root: -- ..Thus here in the first instance, clear comprehension of non- delusion should be understood, by way of the accurate knowledge of the root. " endquote So indeed your comment is correct: "My take on this is that at a moment of mindfullness there is no > sense of "I am doing this" or "I am doing that" or even "doing this" > or "doing that". "" However we have to be careful that we are not taking some type of mild avijja (ignorance) as been sati-sampajjana. There is an object at each moment of consciosness but the object is seen as it is without the usual overlay of me (or I am having sati): "..The passage beginning with the words: Within, it is said, there certainly is no self or soul is stated to explain that looking straight on or looking away from the front is, to be sure, just a variety of occurrence of even bare phenomena and that therefore clear comprehension of non-delusion is the knowing of that fact as it really is [yasma pana alokitadi nama dhamma mattasseva pavatti viseso tasma tassa yathavato jananam asammoha sampajaññanti dassetum abhantareti adi vuttam]. ""endquote Thus whether there is sati-sampajanna or not can only be known each for himself, the teachings help point us in the right direction though. I like what you said about" Whatever activity seems to be taking place would > only appear so to a third-party observer."" At first I was going to say 'but sati is an activity'. But then in another way it is tearing down the wall of I making (the paticcasamuppada). It is about as non-active as it can be from the standpoint of worldly activity. And so even one who is walking and talking; when there are any moments of genuine sati-sampajanna is inactive in this sense. We can also see that it is not easy to have sati because it is going against our usual wordly way of attachment. Sati comes with non- attachment, which is why the effort/energy that comes with sati is so profound. RobertK 39750 From: kenhowardau Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 7:35pm Subject: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) Hi Larry, I wrote; ------------ > > "May I ask your views on the profundity of the Buddha's teaching? What is it telling us that we don't already know?" > > ------------ And you replied: --------------- > Regarding impermanence, he says desiring or even valuing anything that is impermanent leads to dukkha, in one way or another, always. I don't think we really know that and probably are a little afraid to know it. It seems almost inhuman. --------------- That's good commonsense, and I think almost everyone teaches it. When the Bible says, 'Put not your treasures where rust and moth doth corrupt,' it is warning us not to have faith in anything impermanent: ----------------------- L: > Plus the tactic of rejecting all pleasure usually hides a gigantic desire for release. In this case the desire is for a concept that will never arise [this may not be in the suttas]. > ----------------------- I'm not sure of your point, there. I did ask for something profound: perhaps you've given me more than I can handle. :-) ----------------------------- L: > In any case, even though impermanence may be obvious, he repeated that message over and over. Whatever is impermanent is dukkha. Whatever is impermanent and dukkha is not self. > ----------------------------- Yes, he said, "In short, the five khandhas are dukkha." (Dhammacakkappavattana) But what are the five khandhas? Are nations, people and chariots the five khandhas? No, they are mere concepts, and this is where the Dhamma becomes truly profound. I think we should be learning all we can about the khandhas. Ken H 39751 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 8:35pm Subject: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "plnao" wrote: > > > Hi all > > > Phil I think that's why K Sujin asks "is there seeing now?" The answer > is very > > likely "no", and being able > > to answer "no" is evidence of deepening insight. > > Thinking afterwards, I would add that yes, of course, there is seeing now > but we > are unaware of it. Friend Phil, Sorry to have misquoted but I don't see a big difference between "What are you seeing now?" and "Is there seeing now?" The second is simply crouched in politically correct non-atta terms. But, you have delighted me with your two posts on this question because you have proven my point: The question is silly! ;-) If you think about this question deeply, in every possible aspect, you will soon come to the conclusion that there isn't an answer. As Herman pointed out, it is like a koan, a riddle without a solution. Personally, I don't think this type of question, usually given when asked a direct question, is really supposed to answer anything. It is probably just meant to befuddle the person until they shut up. ;-) Metta, James 39752 From: Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 8:41pm Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) Hi Ken H, You wrote, in part: K: "Yes, he said, "In short, the five khandhas are dukkha." (Dhammacakkappavattana) But what are the five khandhas? Are nations, people and chariots the five khandhas? No, they are mere concepts, and this is where the Dhamma becomes truly profound. I think we should be learning all we can about the khandhas." L: I agree, but I think what we have to see directly is that what we desire is ungraspable, either because it is a concept and cannot be truly experienced or because it is immediately impermanent. Concepts are no less unsatisfactory than realities if they are objects of desire. And I think we can see directly the conceptuality of concepts. Take a person you especially like, for example. Can you see directly that you cannot really experience that person? You can't even come close. The more carefully you examine who and what that person is, the less you see a whole person. If you can see directly how impossible it is to experience that person and at the same time see that there is a person there, then that is a direct insight into concept. If understood correctly this insight should dissolve all desire to grasp that person, whether physically or conceptually. Larry 39753 From: Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 9:23pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' TG: "I'm pretty rusty on my Nagarjuna, but my recollection was that Nagarjuna was a pure "anti-conceptualist." " Hi TG, If anything Nagarjuna could be said to be the ultimate eel-wriggler, neither 'anti' nor 'not-anti', nor both nor neither. (I might have a few too many negatives in there to make sense.) Anyway, the favorite criticism is that he doesn't have a position. His defenders refute that with subtle arguments too subtle for me to understand. It looks to me, from a Theravada abhidhamma point of view, that he is analyzing concepts, not realties, and showing how they are logically ungraspable in a conceptual sense. Aha! there's the anti-conceptualist. But still, I think this is just pointing out no self nature (asabhava), which is standard abhidhamma lingo for concept. This is a valid approach because it is not too difficult to argue that all objects of desire are concepts. But that is my own argument, neither Nargarjuna's nor abhidhamma's. Larry 39754 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 10:36pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread (174) Dear Htoo, You're providing more helpful details. This was a long post, but I thought the content was very useful. Here's an extract: --- htootintnaing wrote: > So depending on realms of citta there are > > a) 54 kamavacara cittas > b) 15 rupavacara cittas > c) 12 arupavacara cittas > d) 8 lokuttara cittas > ------- > 89 total cittas > > These are realms of citta. These are not realms of beings. .... S: A good point to stress again and again! .... >So > kamavacara cittas may still arise in other bhumi of beings apart from > kama bhumi. Rupavacara cittas can also arise in manussa bhumi or > human realm and deva realms. Arupavacara cittas can also arise in > manussa bhumi or human realm, deva realms and rupa brahma realms > apart from arupa brahma bhumi. > > If magga cittas arise in the vicinity of 5 jhanas with the power of > those jhana then 8 lokuttara cittas may be counted as ( 8 >< 5 > jhana ) 40 lokuttara cittas. > > So there will be 121 total cittas and they are > > 1. 54 kamavacara cittas > 2. 15 rupavacara cittas > 3. 12 arupavacara cittas > 4. 40 lokuttara cittas > ------------ > 121 total cittas .... No nit-picking for most these posts - very good;-) Thank you for your contributions and comments on the Cetasikas too. Metta, Sarah p.s I also thought your post on smiles was a good one;-);-) ===== 39755 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 10:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vis. XIV, 122 and Tiika Dear Nina, I like this quote below a lot: --- nina wrote: > As we read in the Co. to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha (T.A., p. > 129): <...thus one should understand that when consciousness is > operating, > it operates by virtue of the fixed order of consciousness (citta > niyama), > like the fixed order of the seasons and seeds, without there being > anyone > issuing orders saying,¹You are adverting and come immediately after > existence-continuum (bhavanga-citta); you are, say, seeing, or whatever, > and > come immediately after adverting.¹> .... S: It was the point I was stressing to Howard on conditions - it is the nature of cittas that they follow according to citta niyama. We can test out how impossible it is to direct cittas at this moment. 'You, lobha, don't return again. Come sati now after seeing...'No;-). Metta, Sarah p.s I think there was a typo earlier in this post. You wrote 'when the object is great, the object cannot last longer than the javana-cittas'.Perhaps you meant 'not great'? ============== 39756 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 10:54pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 73- Volition/cetanaa (c) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.4 Volition(cetanaa]contd] ***** The cetasikas which accompany citta share the same object, but they each have to fulfil their own task. For example, phassa contacts the object, vedanå feels, experiences the “taste” of the object, and saññå “marks” and remembers the object. Cetanå sees to it that the other dhammas it arises together with fulfil their tasks with regard to the object they all share. Every cetanå which arises, no matter whether it accompanies kusala citta, akusasa citta, vipåkacitta or kiriyacitta, has to coordinate the tasks of the other dhammas it accompanies. The cetanå which accompanies kusala citta and akusala citta has, in addition to coordinating, another task to perform: ‘willing’ or ‘activity of kamma’(1). According to the Atthasåliní, as to activity in moral and immoral acts, cetanå is exceedingly energetic whereas the accompanying cetasikas play only a restricted part. Cetanå which accompanies kusala citta and akusala citta coordinates the work of the other cetasikas it arises together with and it ‘wills’ kusala or akusala, thus, it makes a “double effort”. The Atthasåliní compares the double task of cetanå to the task of a landowner who directs the work of his labourers, looks after them and also takes himself an equal share of the work. He doubles his strength and doubles his effort. Even so volition doubles its strength and its effort in moral and immoral acts. *** 1) Åyúhana which means ‘striving’ or pursuing, is translated in the English text of the Atthasåliní as conation, and in the english text of the Visuddhimagga as accumulation. ***** [Ch.4 Volition(cetanaa) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 39757 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 11:23pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' Hello Joop, Larry, TG, Antony, and all, Thank you all for your replies - I don't have much to add at this moment - still reflecting and forming questions. As a side note, you may be interested in Prof. Richard P. Hayes's article about "Nagarjuna: Master of Paradox, Mystic or Perpetrator of Fallacies?" http://www.unm.edu/~rhayes/nagarjuna_smith.pdf metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > TG: "I'm pretty rusty on my Nagarjuna, but my recollection was that > Nagarjuna was a pure "anti-conceptualist." " > > Hi TG, > > If anything Nagarjuna could be said to be the ultimate eel- wriggler, > neither 'anti' nor 'not-anti', nor both nor neither. (I might have a few > too many negatives in there to make sense.) Anyway, the favorite > criticism is that he doesn't have a position. His defenders refute that > with subtle arguments too subtle for me to understand. It looks to me, > from a Theravada abhidhamma point of view, that he is analyzing > concepts, not realties, and showing how they are logically ungraspable > in a conceptual sense. Aha! there's the anti-conceptualist. But still, I > think this is just pointing out no self nature (asabhava), which is > standard abhidhamma lingo for concept. > > This is a valid approach because it is not too difficult to argue that > all objects of desire are concepts. But that is my own argument, neither > Nargarjuna's nor abhidhamma's. > > Larry 39758 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 11:56pm Subject: pabhassaram cittam (luminous mind) - was Letter to B.Bodhi-'The Jhânas and the Lay Disciple ..' copy of letter just sent to B.Bodhi ====================================== Dear Ven Bodhi, Thank your for your kind and considered comments which I may respond to separately. I need to consider further. As you say, much depends on the weight one gives to the commentaries in these matters. Meanwhile, I didn’t keep a copy of your letter on the ‘pabhassaram cittam’ in my personal mail, but your letter was sent to DSG . I believe this is the one you were referring to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/16751 As I looked for it, I also noted that Nina replied on DSG here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/16771 In another post I quoted your comments from the back of your anthology from Anguttara Nikaya (p.278, note 13) which I think gives a good summary of the meaning of Luminous (pabhassaram) and pretty much accords with what some of us have been saying and quoting. "Luminous (pabhassaram). AA states that here "the mind" (citta) refers to the bhavanga-citta, the "life-continuum" or underlying stream of consciousness which supervenes whenever active consciousness lapses, most notably in deep sleep. The 'adventitious defilements' are greed, hatred and delusion, which appear at a stage of the cognitive process which, in later Buddhist literature, is called javana, "impulsion". AA says that the defilements do not arise simultaneously with the bhavanga, but they 'arrive' later, at the phase of javana. the fact that this expression "luminous mind" does not signify any "eternal and pure mind-essence" is evident for the preceding text, in which the mind is said to be extremely fleeting and transitory. the "uninstructed worldling" (assutavaa puthujjana) is one who lacks adequate knowledge of the dhamma and training in its practice." ***** In a more recent letter to me (10th October, 2003), you wrote with regard to your earlier comments (in the first link): BB: >Re-reading my note on pabhassara-citta after one year (it was almost Exactly one year ago that we were in Hong Kong), I still agree with it. To me, the idea that 'luminosity' is an intrinsic quality of citta, consisting in its ability to "illuminate" objects, seems more convincing than the idea that pabhassaram cittam refers to the 'bhavanga,' a concept that comes to prominence only in a considerably later strata of Buddhist literature. Still, the fact that the statement is made without elucidation in the Nikaya text may imply that it was intended to be suggestive rather than definitive, and thus should not be pinned down to one exclusive interpretation. I hope this is what you were looking for. Please let me know anytime you wish to retrieve any of your letters. Metta, Sarah ======= BB: > P.S. I had meant to ask you: A couple of years ago, I think it was in > the course of the last trip -- of late 2002 -- I made to the Far East, I > had sent you a letter commenting on the 'pabhassaram cittam' (luminous > mind) idea. I seem to have accidentally deleted that file from my hard > drive, probably thinking it was just a routine letter with nothing of 39759 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 0:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' Dear Chris & All, --- christine_forsyth wrote: > > > Hello Joop, Larry, TG, Antony, and all, > > Thank you all for your replies - I don't have much to add at this > moment - still reflecting and forming questions. ... S: I also don't have much to add, but would like to say it's a good topic to raise as there tend to be a lot of misunderstandings in this area. I thought TG's post with all the good quotes was excellent. He was ready and armed for this one!! Also Joop gave a good summary, I thought. For more quotes on nibbana, you might like to look one rainy day in U.P. under 'Udana' for a series I wrote from the commentary and also of course under 'Nibbana' for many more quotes. No samsara involved;-). I also agreed with the gist of the Francis Story article, though I always find room for nit-picking in his writings (but that's probably just me - I've been marking student assignments for far too long, I think;-)). I think Larry gave some pertinent comments too on Nagarjuna's work. Possibly see U.P, under 'Nagarjuna'. From what I've gathered from long, long dscussions with members like Anders and Rob Ep before on DSG, there are just two lines in the Tipitaka which particularly have been used (some might say abused!) for much of the Mahayana edifice and these kinds of ideas. One of these is the line about luminous mind (AN1:10)just referred to in my letter to BB (see 'luminous' in UP for more) and the other is the line where vinnana refers to nibbana (and not consciousness) which was discussed in detail before. (I've just forgotten the sutta, MN49, I think). Probably you'll find posts on it under 'nibbana' or by searching for 'Anders'and 'vinnana' or 'nibbana' in dsg.org I'll also be glad to hear further comments. Thx for raising it. Metta, Sarah ========= > As a side note, you may be interested in Prof. Richard P. Hayes's > article about "Nagarjuna: Master of Paradox, Mystic or Perpetrator > of Fallacies?" > http://www.unm.edu/~rhayes/nagarjuna_smith.pdf 39760 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 0:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Buddha In His First Week Hi Agrios, You asked Htoo some good questions here: --- agriosinski wrote: > > Could I have your detailed explanation, in depth picture of what > avija comes to be and how it leads, what exactly happens that sankharas > arise. > And then what sankhara is and how it leads to vinnana etc. etc. > Or if you don't feel like writing about it, could you point me to > the other source? ... S: You could also look at some of the past posts (saved by the moderators!!) in U.P. under: 'ignorance' and 'dependent origination' http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts You may get sent to the Pali names, I forget how they're classified. Why not take a look and come back with any unanswered questions or comments you read which don't make sense or which you'd like to discuss further. Metta, Sarah ========= 39761 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 1:06am Subject: Re: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi Phil (Sarah (!!),James, Nina & All), This is a good topic and I’d like to join in. --- plnao wrote: > > Phil I think that's why K Sujin asks "is there seeing now?" The > answer > is very > > likely "no", and being able > > to answer "no" is evidence of deepening insight. > Phil again:> Thinking afterwards, I would add that yes, of course, there is seeing > now > but we > are unaware of it. In almost all cases, what we take to be seeing > something > is actually *looking at.* … Yes! The second answer is more to the point, I think. Why is seeing and visible object stressed? In India (Jetavana on audio), K.Sujin was saying that this is the doorway that most people have most difficulty with and raise most questions about. It is always the first doorway mentioned in the suttas too. Nina has already written about its importance and the misunderstanding that arises on account of the eye door, but I’d like to add a little more. As you have said we have long, long stories about what is seen and we completely forget that it’s only visible object that is seen. By remembering that it is only visible object appearing, slowly there will be less interest in all the ideas about what’s seen and we won’t be quite so lost in the ocean of concepts. Sound or taste may seem more obviously only very briefly experienced, but gradually with the development of understanding, I think visible object can be known to be just as brief and momentary and quite different from all those stories. I’ve heard K.sujin saying that visible object is only one rupa appearing, but because it appears with different colours and detail, it brings more ideas about it, even when it doesn’t appear. We are not as attached on the whole to our memories about sounds or other sense objects and so there is less proliferating about them. She’s said there are conditions for taking note of what appears more often such as the different characteristics, colours and so on. In addition, visible object keeps appearing even though it’s only one rupa. It’s very, very common, more common than sound or taste for example. So it conditions more thinking in our memories. When awareness grows, I think we can also begin to see that visible object appears in between moments of hearing, tasting, smelling etc and certainly while thinking (conventionally speaking here). These experiences through the eye-door therefore also play more of a role in influencing our ideas of people,things and self-views. So back to K.Sujin’s question ‘Is there seeing now?’. It’s intended as a reminder of what is real as opposed to what is being conceptualized right now. As you say,”the value of knowing this is, of course, that it points yet again at the lack of self that can steer citta processes in a desired direction. Yet more evidence of the overwhelming influence of conditions”. Metta, Sarah p.s love your comments about moving or not moving into the Brahma vihara club and the quip on the Marx Brothers line;-) Also your comments to KK on wanting metta. Yes, at these times of metta meditation (or vipassana meditation when there’s any attempt to ‘have vipassana’), K.Sujin would say, ‘it’s not the study of mind, but the study of self’ at such times;-).So go swimming, sit in lotus on your nice Japanese cushions (my choice too!) and avoid the News by all means. Just no need to equate any of these actions with ‘vipassana meditation’;-). ===================================================================== 39762 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 1:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 133 ), lokuttara citta and dukkha. Dear Nina (Htoo and Ken O), --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Sarah and Htoo, > recently Ken O explained it very clearly. We have to know whether the > context is: dukkha as one of the noble Truths or dukkha lakkha.na. All > cittas are impermanent and thus dukkha. But the noble truth of dukkha > does > not apply to lokuttara citta, it does not have as origin the second > noble > truth: clinging. ... Yes, thank you for reminding me about Ken O's post which I'd put aside too. I may have attributed his comment to Htoo by mistake. As you say, the context is important and the Dispeller comments need to be read carefully I think. ... > sarahprocterabbott@y...: > > > You said, I believe, that the lokuttara cittas are not included in > dukkha > > in the 4 Noble Truths. I heard K.Sujin explain the same, saying this > was > > because these cittas couldn't be known prior to being experienced or > sth > > along those lines. .... Ken O quoted from the Abhidhammattha Sangaha I believe: "The items joined with the path and the fruit are outside the four truths." I came across more detail in STA (the comy) on this, p283: "The items joined with the path are the remaining items, other than the eight factors, beginning with contact that are associated with the path, and the fruit along with its associated items - these are outside, excluded from, the four truths from an absolute standpoint. But from a relative standpoint, since it is stated in the exposition of the faculty of having known that it is a 'path factor and included in the path', it is possible, in the case of the dhammas belonging to the fruit, to include right view, etc, in the truth of the path, and the other dhammas associated with the paths and fruits in the truth of suffering because they share in the suffering constituted by conditioned formations. When this is done the summarising of all also occurs in the teaching of the truths." .... S: 'in the exposition of the faculty of having known that it is a 'path factor and included in the path' I find this interesting in the light of KS's comment above. Metta, Sarah ======= 39763 From: jwromeijn Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 2:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' And absabhava = pannatti ? --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: ... Larry states: "no self nature (asabhava), which is standard abhidhamma lingo for concept" Are you really correct? Is in the Abhidhamma asabhava (no self nature) = pannatti (concept) ? I cannot believe it. Perhaps only in the commentaries ? To me sabhava and asabhava are themselves concepts. And, what is worse: they are wrong concepts; nothing has a self nature, it is atta- belief ! I'm not the first who thinks so. In Wheel 412/413 "The Dhamma Theory, Philosophical Cornerstone of the Abhidhamma", Y. Karunadasa explains: " … in the post-canonical exegetical literature of Sri Lanka where, for the first time, the term sabhåva (Skt svabhåva) came to be used as a synonym for dhamma. Hence the recurrent definition: "Dhammas are so called because they bear their own nature" (attano sabhåva◊ dhårent¥ ti dhammå). Now the question that arises here is whether the Theravådins used the term sabhåva in the same sense as the Sarvåstivådins did. Did the Theravådins assume the metaphysical view that the substance of a dhamma persists throughout the three phases of time? In other words, does this amount to the admission that there is a duality between the dhamma and its sabhåva, between the bearer and the borne, a dichotomy which goes against the grain of the Buddhist doctrine of anattå? … (snip) … It is also observed that if the dhammas are said to have own-nature (saka-bhåva = sabhåva), this is only a tentative device to drive home the point that there is no other-nature (para-bhåva) from which they emerge and to which they finally lapse. Now this commentarial definition of dhamma as sabhåva poses an important problem, for it seems to go against an earlier Theravåda tradition recorded in the Pa†isambhidåmagga. This canonical text specifically states that the five aggregates are devoid of own-nature (sabhåvena-suñña◊). Since the dhammas are the elementary constituents of the five aggregates, this should mean that the dhammas, too, are devoid of own-nature. What is more, does not the very use of the term sabhåva, despite all the qualifications under which it is used, give the impression that a given dhamma exists in its own right? And does this not amount to the admission that a dhamma is some kind of substance? The commentators were not unaware of these implications and they therefore took the necessary steps to forestall such a conclusion. This they sought to do by supplementing the former definition with another which actually nullifies the conclusion that the dhammas might be quasi-substances. This additional definition states that a dhamma is not that which bears its own-nature, but that which is borne by its own conditions (paccayehi dhåriyant¥ ti dhammå). Whereas the earlier definition is agent-denotation (kattusådhana) because it attributes an active role to the dhamma, elevating it to the position of an agent, the new definition is object-denotation (kamma-sådhana) because it attributes a passive role to the dhamma and thereby downgrades it to the position of an object. What is radical about this new definition is that it reverses the whole process which otherwise might culminate in the conception of dhammas as substances or bearers of their own-nature. What it seeks to show is that, far from being a bearer, a dhamma is being borne by its own conditions. … (snip) … In the Abhidhammic exegesis this term paramattha is defined to mean that which has reached its highest (uttama), implying thereby that the dhammas are ultimate existents with no possibility of further reduction. Hence own-nature (sabhåva) came to be further defined as ultimate nature (paramattha-sabhåva)." See http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha227.htm Sofar this quote. By the way, in this Wheel publication Karunadasa is saying important thing about the theme "Pannatti and the Two truth" too. Metta Joop 39764 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 2:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: latent tendencies. Hi Howard, op 13-12-2004 17:50 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: From time to time Abhidhammic material and commentarial > material is amazingly vague, amazingly fuzzy.... other very important things > such as the precise nature of latent tendencies and the apparent sort of > permanence to them, are quite vague. N: Thanks for your kind words. But more important: do ask again when anything is not clear in the texts, you render me a service. (The same for my Vis. studies.) It is an opportunity for me to look at dhammas from all angles. Let's walk again through the text and I add remarks: >> In the , in the Commentary to the , the >> Sixth Book of the Abhidhamma, we read in the section on the latent >> tendencies (anusaya-våra) and the section on > tendencies> (sånusaya-våra): N: saanusaya: sa+anusaya: with latent tendencies, thus, having latent tendencies. Text: "In the section on being possessed of latent tendencies the Buddha said : >> Who is with the latent tendency of sense desire, he is possessed of it' . >> It is just like someone who suffers extremely from the sickness of old age, >> and so on, and, so long as he is not cured from this sickness, is called a >> sick person even when illness does not arise. N: Even at rebirth or at the moment of kusala citta, we are still sick, even though the akusala cetasika does not arise with the citta. Text: It is the same in the case of someone with defilements who is traversing >> the round of rebirths whose latent tendencies have not been eradicated by >> the noble eightfold Path. Even though the latent tendencies do not arise he >> is called a person who is possessed of the latent tendencies. N: From birth to death our life consists of an uninterrupted stream of cittas, succeeding one another. Even when no objects are experienced through the six doors by cittas arising in processes, there is still citta that keeps the continuity in our life: the bhavanga-citta. And again, again, the stream of cittas goes on in the next life (see my Vis. studies). The latent sickness is not cured, unless enlightenment is attained in different stages, and then, only at arahatship no trace of it is left. Text: Thus, concerning such latent tendencies he is possessed with, he finds them quite >> acceptable. N: The Pali has: aamanta, . One goes along with them, not knowing their danger. >> Thus we see that there are latent tendencies in each of the cittas that are >> arising and falling away in succession so long as they have not been >> eradicated by the noble eightfold Path. >> Text: 2. The latent tendencies have in the sense of > soil> >> (bhumiladdhuppanna). This refers to the defilements that cannot yet be >> eradicated and are present in their own soil. >> N: The word arisen is also used, but in the meaning as quoted above. Arisen, uppanna has different meanings. This may be intricate. When I say, the latent tendencies do not arise, I do not mean they are unconditioned like nibbana. It only means: they are dormant in the citta, do not come out, but can condition the arising of akusala. Then, we have texts where the word arisen is used but in a specific sense. See below. >> See also Nyanponika, Abh Studies, p. 121, 122. Nyanaponika: (bhuumiladdhuppanna), that is, a fertile soil for the actual arising. This applies to potential defilements (kilesa), which are in the sense of possessing a fertile soil from which they may actually sprout when other conditions for their arising are given...These potential defilements may be compared to dangerous microbes infesting the body, which, though in a latent state, may become active at any moment when the condiitons are favorable...> He then refers to the Abhidhamma texts: dhammas favorable to defilements, to cankers, etc. H: As phenomena that truly exist, and latent tendencies are certainly > such, and being other than nibbana, they should be subject to the > moment-to-moment arising and ceasing that all other such realities are subject > to. N: There is no store citta where they would stay. The middle has to be kept between eternalism and annihilation. They are dhammas, not pa~n~natti. They are powerful, they condition the arising of all sorts of akusala. Where are they? Deeply engrained in each citta, even in kusala citta, because cittas succeed one another from moment to moment and thus, all experiences, all tendencies, good or bad, are accumulated from one moment to the next. We can verify this in life: citta falls away, but you can learn from what you experienced before. Good qualities can become good habits, and bad ones bad habits. One may take a sip of a drink, and slowly one likes it more and more, a new habit. One may tell just a little lie, and slowly one gets into the habit of lying. The akusala citta falls away and more of that type is added to the latent tendencies. Thus, these change all the time. H: If one were to say that anusaya are deep-seated cetasikas that may > be strengthened and weakened, but otherwise tenaciously replicate themselves > from moment to moment, and that manifest as outflowings, that would be an > explanation that is sufficiently detailed and credible for me to "buy". N: Is this not more or less what is said above? They do not replicate themselves each moment, because there are also kusala cittas. Because of the defilements that appear we know that there are these underlying microbes that are with each citta arising and falling away in the long, long stream of cittas, in the cycle of birth and death. As I explained to Mike, with the arising of each akusala citta, the underlying sickness gets worse. But on the other hand, by wisdom they can also wear out. I hope you and Mike will also ask again when there is anything not yet cleared up. Nina. P.S. Rupa lasts as long as seventeen moments of citta: we cannot count but it helps us to have more understanding of the process of cittas experiencing a sense object that has not fallen away yet. It reminds us that very soon after seeing defilements can arise on account of the sense object that is still present. That objcet is not a concept. 39765 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 2:37am Subject: Re: Vism.XIV,123, and Tiika Vism.XIV,123, and Tiika (n) At the end of registration the life-continuum resumes its occurrence. When the [resumed occurrence of the] life-continuum is again interrupted, adverting, etc., occur again, and when the conditions obtain, the consciousness continuity repeats its occurrence as adverting, and next to adverting seeing, etc., N: The Tiika states that it is implied that after seeing the receiving-consciousness arises, and so on for the other cittas performing their functions in the process. It also mentions hearing, smelling, tasting, and the experience of tangible object. Again and again (puna, puna). The Vis. text reminds us of the danger of being in the cycle of birth and death which is dukkha. Again and again we have to experience objects, pleasant or unpleasant, and happiness and sorrow arise in life. Again and again defilements are likely to arise on account of what we experience. This is an exhortation to develop right understanding of whatever dhamma appears, so that eventually there will be the end of the cycle. Text Vis: according to the law of consciousness, again and again, until the life-continuum of one becoming is exhausted. N: The law of consciousness, in Pali: citta niyama, which is the fixed order of the occurrence of cittas. Nobody can change this. The bhavanga-citta maintains the continuity in the life of an individual. From birth to death our life consists of an uninterrupted stream of cittas, succeeding one another. Also in between the processes when one does not experience an object impinging on one of the six doors, there has to be citta so that one stays alive. And again, again, the stream of cittas goes on in the next life. The dying-consciousness is the last bhavanga-citta in a life and after that a new life begins. Text Vis. : For the last life-continuum consciousness of all in one becoming is called death (cuti) because of falling (cavanatta) from that [becoming]. So that is of nineteen kinds too [like rebirth-linking and life-continuum]. N: The dying-consciousness is the last bhavangacitta and thus it can be one of the nineteen types, just as in the case of all the other bhavanga-cittas. Vis. Text: This is how the occurrence of nineteen kinds of resultant consciousness should be understood as death. N: Reviewing: these types are: 1 akusala vipaaka santiira.na-citta (ahetuka, result of akusala kamma) 1 kusala vipaaka santiira.na-citta (ahetuka, result of weak kaamaavacara kusala kamma) 8 mahaa-vipaakacittas (sahetuka, results of kaamaavacara kusala kammas) 5 ruupaavacara vipaakacittas (sahetuka, results of ruupa-jhaanacittas) 4 aruupaavacara vipaakacittas (sahetuka, results of aruupa-jhaanacittas) Thus, nineteen types of citta can perform the function of rebirth, bhavanga (life-continuum) and dying. ****** Nina 39766 From: jwromeijn Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 3:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > A theory could easily be view (ditthi). I understand view to be a > concept one clings to. In this area it is often difficult to distinguish > concept from reality, but the clinging is pretty obvious, though > sometimes not so obvious. I really believe I am real. Don't you? > Dear Larry and all To me, and I realize that's not very orthodox Theravada, a 'concept' is the same as a 'theory' And for Larry who states "A theory could easily be view (ditthi)", some more explanation of what I mean. I use the term 'theory' in the way of philosophy of science. Without looking in any books of it, theory means than something like: a model of, a picture of the reality, only existing in the mind of the human beings, using this model (not existing in itself, as such). That human beings using the theory know very very that's only a model of reality, not the reality itself, because the socalled reality can only be described in models. There are more than one paradigma's in philosophy of science, I prefer Popper who (simplified) says than one can state that a theory is correct (more precise: not incorrect) as long as all empirically based efforts to falsify the theory, failed. Others (Kuhn) say that a theory is not used any more and subsistuted by another theory when most scientists think the new one is more useful, and 'useful' is something else than 'correct' ! To me (maybe a personal opinion) any concept is that kind of theory: only a consumption-thing, only a pragmatic useful image of the indescribable reality. And are the (paramattha) dhammas of the Abhidhamma that reality ? I think that's not the question. That dhammas are the best way to describe the processes in me (in any human being) and I have to be aware if I want to get enlightened. Metta Joop 39767 From: Alan Lam Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 2:36am Subject: The Jhaanas and the lay disciples. Note: forwarded message attached. ===== With best regards, ........................... Alan Lam 39768 From: Alan Lam Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 2:24am Subject: Hello. Hi, I am a newbie here. Hope to learn from all of you. Thanks in advance and Metta. Alan ===== With best regards, ........................... Alan Lam 39769 From: sarahprocterabbott Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 3:31am Subject: Re: Hello. Hi Alan, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Alan Lam wrote: > > Hi, I am a newbie here. Hope to learn from all of you. > Thanks in advance and Metta. Alan > ... I'm glad you've made it here! I know we can all learn a lot from you and your keen interest in the Dhamma too. With regard to your other message, unfortunately the list doesn't accept attachments, so would you mind re-sending it as text in a message? Many thanks in advance. I'd also be especially glad to hear where you live and anything about your background interest in the Teachings. Metta, Sarah p.s look forward to further discussion on the 'Jhana and Lay Disciple' thread.... apologies for any delays in advance. ========================== 39770 From: AlanLam Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 3:35am Subject: The jhaanas and the Lay Disciples Dear Sarah, A respected member of E-Sangha (www.lioncity.net) has your yahoogroup link there where I came across your knowledgeable comments on "The Jhaanas and the Lay Disciples according to the Paali Suttas". I read with interest and respect your command of the Visudhimagga. I do concur with most of your comments, but I do have 2nd opinion on the following which you have posted reply to Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi as follows; SN55.40/V398-99 Quote : He is content with his confirmed confidence in the Buddha (etc.). But strives further in seclusion by day and in retreat by night. As he dwells diligently, gladness arises (as above)... for one who is happy the mind becomes concentrated. When the mind is concentrated, phenomena become manifest. It is with manifestation of phenomena to him that he is reckoned as "one who dwells diligently". (31). Unquote. Here please allow me to address the above point by point as follows; "But strives further in seclusion by day" : "strives" could mean he "energetically meditated" in seclusion by day. Buddha always remind his disciples to stay in meditation in seclusions, i.e. in a forest under the tree or in empty building. "in retreat by night". : "retreat" always mean "meditation practise in seclusions" without disturbance. And retreat could also mean "working very ernestly in meditation". It is a full time meditation process during a retreat. Hence, here it should mean that he is "in strict and diligent meditation by day and by night". Working ernestly hard in meditation. "As he dwells diligently, gladness arises" : "dwell" here could mean "engrossed", "fully concentrated" and "energetically meditating", lasting for a period of time. "gladness arises" : Here "gladness" is a distinct mark called "piti" or "raptures". For one who ernestly meditates and achieving a state of continuous samadhi djyana, there will be stages of piti or raptures, i.e. feelings of "extreme joy" or "extreme happiness". This mark of piti/raptures could last for a while to hours or a day long depending on one's length of samadhi djyana immersion then. Here, "gladness" could mean "contentment" or "full of joy" as a mark of piti or raptures because of the continuous immersion in samadhi djyana. "For one who is happy" : Here, "happy" could again mean the only mark of "piti or raptures" of "bliss", "extreme joy" of different stages similar to "gladness", due to the continuous samadhi djyana achived. Yes, surely this is the only "djyana" state of mind. "the mind becomes concentrated" : Only due to the distinct mark piti/raptures that the mind is still in "one-pointedness". This is also the samadhi djyana state of mind. Hence, here he has achived samadhi djyana state and thus NOT, I would like to repeat, NOT "Access Concentration" and or "Entering Concentration" as you have commented. As either of the two (2) (Access or Entering Concentration) does not and will not, come with the mark of piti or raptures. Only prolonged djyana does have this mark of piti/raptures. I would then greatly appreciate if you could again please cross-check and advise if you do agree to the above analysis. Much thanks and regards. Yours in the Dharma, with Metta. Pubbarama 39771 From: Ken O Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 3:57am Subject: Re: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi Sarah There is a passage on Dispeller of Delusion on Elements, as to order why eye is said first, then the rest. I cannot write it now bc I am away. One of the reason that eye is said because of its obviousness as compare to the rest. Could you type it out for the sake of the rest of the readers. Thanks Ken O 39772 From: Ken O Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' And absabhava = pannatti ? Hi Joop We have before discuss something on sabhava, I think it is in the U.P. After reading it if u still have any quesions, I am most happen to reply u. Ken O 39773 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' And absabhava = pannatti ? Hello Joop, all, Have you read the 20 + posts in the Useful Posts under the subject 'Sabhava (with essence, particular characteristic)': http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/ This is a sample (from Sarah) and discusses points by Prof. Karunadasa in The Dhamma Theory. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/29873 metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jwromeijn" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > ... > > Larry states: > "no self nature (asabhava), which is standard abhidhamma lingo for > concept" > > Are you really correct? Is in the Abhidhamma asabhava (no self nature) > = pannatti (concept) ? > I cannot believe it. Perhaps only in the commentaries ? > To me sabhava and asabhava are themselves concepts. And, what is > worse: they are wrong concepts; nothing has a self nature, it is atta- > belief ! > > I'm not the first who thinks so. In Wheel 412/413 "The Dhamma Theory, > Philosophical Cornerstone of the Abhidhamma", Y. Karunadasa explains: > > " … in the post-canonical exegetical literature of Sri Lanka where, > for the first time, the term sabhåva (Skt svabhåva) came to be used > as a synonym for dhamma. Hence the recurrent definition: "Dhammas are > so called because they bear their own nature" (attano sabhåva◊ > dhårent¥ ti dhammå). Now the question that arises here is whether the > Theravådins used the term sabhåva in the same sense as the > Sarvåstivådins did. Did the Theravådins assume the metaphysical view > that the substance of a dhamma persists throughout the three phases > of time? In other words, does this amount to the admission that there > is a duality between the dhamma and its sabhåva, between the bearer > and the borne, a dichotomy which goes against the grain of the > Buddhist doctrine of anattå? > … (snip) … > It is also observed that if the dhammas are said to have own- nature > (saka-bhåva = sabhåva), this is only a tentative device to drive > home the point that there is no other-nature (para-bhåva) from which > they emerge and to which they finally lapse. > Now this commentarial definition of dhamma as sabhåva poses an > important problem, for it seems to go against an earlier Theravåda > tradition recorded in the Pa†isambhidåmagga. This canonical text > specifically states that the five aggregates are devoid of own- nature > (sabhåvena-suñña◊). Since the dhammas are the elementary constituents > of the five aggregates, this should mean that the dhammas, too, are > devoid of own-nature. What is more, does not the very use of the term > sabhåva, despite all the qualifications under which it is used, give > the impression that a given dhamma exists in its own right? And does > this not amount to the admission that a dhamma is some kind of > substance? > The commentators were not unaware of these implications and they > therefore took the necessary steps to forestall such a conclusion. > This they sought to do by supplementing the former definition with > another which actually nullifies the conclusion that the dhammas > might be quasi-substances. This additional definition states that a > dhamma is not that which bears its own-nature, but that which is > borne by its own conditions (paccayehi dhåriyant¥ ti dhammå). Whereas > the earlier definition is agent-denotation (kattusådhana) because it > attributes an active role to the dhamma, elevating it to the position > of an agent, the new definition is object-denotation (kamma- sådhana) > because it attributes a passive role to the dhamma and thereby > downgrades it to the position of an object. What is radical about > this new definition is that it reverses the whole process which > otherwise might culminate in the conception of dhammas as substances > or bearers of their own-nature. What it seeks to show is that, far > from being a bearer, a dhamma is being borne by its own conditions. > … (snip) … > In the Abhidhammic exegesis this term paramattha is defined to mean > that which has reached its highest (uttama), implying thereby that > the dhammas are ultimate existents with no possibility of further > reduction. Hence own-nature (sabhåva) came to be further defined as > ultimate nature (paramattha-sabhåva)." > > See http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha227.htm > Sofar this quote. By the way, in this Wheel publication Karunadasa is > saying important thing about the theme "Pannatti and the Two truth" > too. > > Metta > > Joop 39774 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 5:32am Subject: Re: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi Ken O, Always happy to help out a fellow dinosaur who likes to quote from the same text;-) thanks for the reminder - I had it marked, so easy to find: Dispeller (Transl of Sammohavinodanii, PTS)223: With regard to the 'order of teaching' "For among the internal bases the eye base is taught first, being obvious through having as its object what is visible (sanidassana) and accompanied by impact (sappa.tigha). After that, the ear base, etc which have as their objects what is invisible and accompanied by impact. Or alternatively the eye base and ear base are taught first among the internal bases because of their great helpfulness as causes for the Incomparable of Seeing and for the Incomparable of Hearing [respectively] (cf A iii 325]. After the three beginning with the nose base. And the mind base [is taught] last because of its having the resorts of the [other] five as its object. But because of their being the [respective] resorts of the eye base and so on, the visible-data base and so on, among the external [bases, are taught] each next [to its correspondeing internal base]. ***** S: The internal bases here are the internal ayatana of eye-sense etc as opposed to the external ayatana or bases of visible object etc. There are of course 12 ayatanas or bases in all. Here's another good quote from the same page I've marked which also neatly addresses questions about the meaning of sabhava and anatta and control;-) 227 "..but here all these bases should be regarded as having no provenance and no destination. For they do not come from anywhere previous to their rise, nor do they go anywhere after their fall; but rather before their rise they had not obtained their intrinsic nature (sabhaava) and after their fall their intrinsic nature is completely broken up; in between what is before and after, they occur without power [being exercisable over them] owing to dependence on conditions. Therefore they should be regarded as having no provenance and no destination. "Likewise [they should be regarded] as inactive and unoccupied. For it does not occur to the eye and visible-datum and so on: 'Would the consciousness might arise from our concurrence.' And they are not active nor do they occupy themselves as door, basis and object for the purpose of arousing consciousness; but rather it is the rule (dhammataa) that eye-consciousness and so on come into being with the concurrence of eye-visible-datum and so on. Therefore they should be regarded as inactive and unoccupied." ***** S: Of course, it's not only in Abhidhamma texts that we read about ayatanas. Entire sections (Sa.laayatanavagga) of the Samyutta Nikaya are devoted to them. But the Abhidhamma (and especially commentaries like this one) makes it a lot easier to follow I find. Thanks for the prompt, Ken O Metta, Sarah ====== --- Ken O wrote: > > Hi Sarah > > There is a passage on Dispeller of Delusion on Elements, as to order > why eye is said first, then the rest. I cannot write it now bc I am > away. One of the reason that eye is said because of its obviousness > as compare to the rest. Could you type it out for the sake of the > rest of the readers. Thanks 39775 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 6:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vis. XIV, 122 and Tiika Dear Sarah, I also like the reminder about citta niyama. No typo here: when the object is mahanta, great: then the object cannot last longer than the > javana-cittas'. And next para: when the object is very great, atimahanta: the object lasts even two more moments longer, there can be tadaaramma.na cittas. When the object is slight there are not even javana cittas. And sometimes a process will not even begin: mogha vaara. Nina. P.s. Gabi will join the next India trip! op 14-12-2004 07:44 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...: > p.s I think there was a typo earlier in this post. You wrote 'when the > object is great, the object cannot last longer than the > javana-cittas'.Perhaps you meant 'not great'? 39776 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 6:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] To all of Nina Hi Herman, op 12-12-2004 22:20 schreef Egbert op hhofman@t...: he asked if > I would be willing to regularly tune the reeds of the organ in the > local Anglican cathedral, and I said Yes, Yes, Yes!!!! (can you tell > I'm excited :-)(I haven't tuned anything for 15 years, but I don't > think the ears forget) N: I am really glad. You do not forget, you have accumulated this skill. From citta to citta. H: Now with regards to Nina and Lodewijk, I'm with Lodewijk, and I will > not have you negating Nina away :-) > > In the dhamma, does not experience arise from the coming together of > rupa, nama and sense-base? Perhaps it is too scientific, but sense > base does not arise in a vacuum, it also requires many other > conditions for its arising. N: Yes. Instead of nervous system I am more inclined to use the word rupas arising because of their appropriate conditions. H: I agree with you if you mean that the ego Nina is not a substantial > entity. ... the story of Nina the actor that negotiates through the > conflicts. These thoughts are real, but they have no foundation. > Nina, the thought, does not, and cannot, do anything. N: Agreed, it is a story we think of, a whole. I would leave out the term conflicts. In reality there are only changing nama elements and rupa elements. But, in practice it is hard to swallow. Bitter medicine! Nina. 39777 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 6:57am Subject: Re: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hello Phil, James, and Sarah, Phil,yes, that is right. I like your clear formulation. The cushion: I talked to Lodewijk about the tatami floor, it is so confortable. Lodewijk said, he should sit on a cushion in the evening and take some time for reflection. Nothing wrong. You have read a lot and at times you need a quiet time for reflection, why not. Only vipassana is a word used for the development of the stages of insight, not just for reflection or relaxation. Lodewijk thinks that using this word here may create confusion. But otherwise, I very well understand what you mean. James, just as I said to Howard, you render me a service by keeping on asking. You see, I listened to Kh sujin 37 years and then one does not realize that others may not get it. I am grateful if you keep on asking. Is there seeing? It is actually meant as a reminder to understand what seeing is: just a citta that experiences visible object, nothing else. James, you made me laugh:< It is probably just meant to befuddle the person until they shut up. ;-) > We should pay attention to what Sarah says: op 14-12-2004 00:22 schreef plnao op plnao@j...: ... of course, there is seeing now > but we > are unaware of it. In almost all cases, what we take to be seeing something > is actually *looking at.* 39778 From: Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 3:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' Hi, Christine - In a message dated 12/14/04 2:25:45 AM Eastern Standard Time, cforsyth1@b... writes: > Hello Joop, Larry, TG, Antony, and all, > > Thank you all for your replies - I don't have much to add at this > moment - still reflecting and forming questions. > > As a side note, you may be interested in Prof. Richard P. Hayes's > article about "Nagarjuna: Master of Paradox, Mystic or Perpetrator > of Fallacies?" > http://www.unm.edu/~rhayes/nagarjuna_smith.pdf > > metta and peace, > Christine > ========================== Just by way of balance, permit me to mention that the good Dr. Hayes, a very brilliant man, is also a fan of Stephen Bachelor's and a disbeliever in literal rebirth. So, you are doing what we *all* do - picking and choosing what appeals to us. (Of course, frequently what appeals to one may be exactly what is correct! ;-) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39779 From: Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations Hi Joop In a message dated 12/14/2004 3:14:55 AM Pacific Standard Time, jwromeijn@y... writes: Dear Larry and all To me, and I realize that's not very orthodox Theravada, a 'concept' is the same as a 'theory' And for Larry who states "A theory could easily be view (ditthi)", some more explanation of what I mean. I would see a 'theory' as a "string of concepts." I use the term 'theory' in the way of philosophy of science. Without looking in any books of it, theory means than something like: a model of, a picture of the reality, only existing in the mind of the human beings, using this model (not existing in itself, as such). That human beings using the theory know very very that's only a model of reality, not the reality itself, because the socalled reality can only be described in models. There are more than one paradigma's in philosophy of science, I prefer Popper who (simplified) says than one can state that a theory is correct (more precise: not incorrect) as long as all empirically based efforts to falsify the theory, failed. Others (Kuhn) say that a theory is not used any more and subsistuted by another theory when most scientists think the new one is more useful, and 'useful' is something else than 'correct' ! To me (maybe a personal opinion) any concept is that kind of theory: only a consumption-thing, only a pragmatic useful image of the indescribable reality. The difference in the way science uses theories to understand to investgate phenomena vs the way a Buddhist might use insight to investigate concepts are huge. A Buddhist might use insight to investigate concepts so that the mind can penetrate delusion on a personal level and "directly experience actuality" and eliminate roots the lead to suffering. Science uses theories to model physical happenings so that those happenings can be better understood. However, since the scientist is unaware of the delusional base of his or her investigation, whatever conclusions the scientist realizes are always subject to their delusional base. With that said, the similarities are that they both use models and concepts to do what they do. The Tipitika is also a model composed of concepts that is designed to use those concepts to develop intuitive knowledge and overcome suffering. Intuitive knowledge might be seen as a metamorphosis of 'conceptual knowledge and mindfulness' cultivation. And are the (paramattha) dhammas of the Abhidhamma that reality ? I think that's not the question. That dhammas are the best way to describe the processes in me (in any human being) and I have to be aware if I want to get enlightened. I think this is super good Joop! By describing the aggregates and elements as "processes" instead of "realities or ultimate realities" one has less chance of falling into the trap of seeing things as substantial or 'with essence,' i.e., self-view. It also enhances the view of the "conditionally realitive and altering nature of phenomena," i.e., Right View. Metta Joop TG 39780 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 9:53am Subject: Dhamma Thread (177) Dear Dhamma Friends, We are discussing on different classifications of citta or consciousness. 1. Classification of citta depending on vedana(62, 1, 1, 2, 55 = 121) 2. Classification of citta depending on hetu (18, 2, 22, 47 = 89 ) 3. Classification of citta depending on jati ( 12, 21, 36, 20 = 89 ) or ( 12, 37, 52, 20 = 121 ) 4. Classification of citta depending on bhumi ( 54, 15, 12, 8 = 89 ) 5. Classifications ...coming We are currently talking on functions of citta. In a life, the first citta is patisandhi citta. In other way, citta at that time does the function of patisandhi or linking. Pati means 'again', and sandhi means 'linking' 'sticking' 'stitching''joining'. The last citta is cuti citta. In the other way, citta at that time does the job of 'last existing'. After which there is no more existence in that life. As a citta has 3 submoments of upada, thi, and bhanga, cuti citta cannot be death consciousness. The dead cannot be conscious. So it is better to call it as dying consciousness after cessation of that cuti citta is death. In a life, the 1st citta is patisandhi citta and the last citta is cuti citta. In between is filled with countless cittas as there are still kamma. As these cittas of in-between are continuation of life, these cittas are called life continuum. It is called bhavanga citta. Bhava means 'existence' or 'life'. Anga means 'part' 'limb' 'factor' 'component'. So bhavanga means 'part of life'. All cittas in a life constitute the whole life. Each citta is a 'part of life'. So essentially all cittas are bhavanga cittas( I will explain_this is my words and idea ). Because each acts as a part of life. But as the 1st citta links the past life cuti citta and 1st bhavanga citta of this life, it is called patisandhi citta. This is function. But characterwise, it is all the same with bhavanga citta. By the same token, cuti citta is characterwise all the same with bhavanga citta. But as it is the last existence and does the function of cuti or 'last-existing' it is called cuti citta. So now citta has three main functions. 1. patisandhi kicca or 'linking function' 2. bhavanga kicca or 'life-continueing function'/life-continuum 3. cuti kicca or 'last-existing function' or 'dying function' Characterwise, all these 3 cittas are all the same. What characters do they have. 1. Bhumi. They all have the same realm of citta or the same bhumi of citta. 2. Jati. They all have the same origin or the same kind 3. Sankhara. They all have the same volition. 4. Sampayutta dhammas. They all have the same accompanying dhammas 5. Arammana. They all take the same object. The object is not the present object. The object is past object or past life object or the object of immediate past life's marana-asanna- javana cittas. So all these 3 cittas will not know any of present object at all. As we all are in sensuous sphere, functions of citta will be explained with examples of sensuous objects. For example, if there arises a sound which is very clear, there has to arise conscious mind to this sound. This sound which is a rupa called sadda or sound serves as object or arammana. There also arises sotapasada or ear-sense-base at the same time of arising of that sound. There is ear. There is sound. But there is no attention to sound. Why? Because a rupa has a life span of 17 cittakkhana or 51 anukhana or 51 submoments. In its initial arising ( upada ), it is not that clear to be perceived as object. At that time, one bhavanga citta passes away. In a life in pancavokara bhumi or beings with 5 khandhas, all cittas have to depend on hadaya vatthu with the exception of 10 pancavinnana cittas. The first vithi citta or conscious mind also has to depend on hadaya vatthu. As it is about to arise, as there arises strong object the sound, and as there arise sotappasada, and everything is ready to take the present object. But citta still takes the past object. But as there arises signal, this 2nd arising bhavanga citta is called vibrating bhavanga citta or bhavanga calana citta. Bhavanga cittas are flowing in rapid succession like a running man's running. When there arises a signal to stop running immediately, he would not be able to stop straight away. Instead, he will overshoot a few steps. The first is atita bhavanga citta or past bhavanga. The 2nd is bhavanga calana or vibrating bhavanga. And the last bhavanga just before arising of vithi cittas or conscious mind is called bhavanguppaccheda or arresting bhavanga. So far there have been only 3 functions (patisandhi, bhavanga, cuti). Now the first vithi citta arises. After that a series of vithi cittas arise and pass away. Each does different functions with the exceptions of javana cittas who repeat 7 times and tadarammana cittas who repeat twice. At the end or at the disappearance of the last tadarammana citta, there arise bhavanga citta again and if there is no further objects, bhavanga citta will arise endlessly till cuti citta. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39781 From: Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 5:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' In a message dated 12/13/2004 9:25:43 PM Pacific Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: Hi TG, If anything Nagarjuna could be said to be the ultimate eel-wriggler, neither 'anti' nor 'not-anti', nor both nor neither. (I might have a few too many negatives in there to make sense.) Anyway, the favorite criticism is that he doesn't have a position. His defenders refute that with subtle arguments too subtle for me to understand. It looks to me, from a Theravada abhidhamma point of view, that he is analyzing concepts, not realties, and showing how they are logically ungraspable in a conceptual sense. Aha! there's the anti-conceptualist. But still, I think this is just pointing out no self nature (asabhava), which is standard abhidhamma lingo for concept. This is a valid approach because it is not too difficult to argue that all objects of desire are concepts. But that is my own argument, neither Nargarjuna's nor abhidhamma's. Larry Hi Larry I wouldn't consider Nagarjuna an ell-wriggler because ell-wrigglers won't take any position in the fear that they will be found wrong (or probably more likely they don't know anything to begin with.) Nagarjuna took a definite stance even if it was conceptual destruction. (An ell-wrigglers position would be to say that: "they can't say whether concepts are true or whether they are false.") Nagarjuna was making a case that concepts cannot represent reality because they are conditionally relative and have no self of their own. I discussed this one time with a highly educated Sri Lankan Theravadin monk and his view that Nagarjuna was reacting to Hinayana schools that were developing all sorts of "substantialist" theories. Seeing things as having "substance of their own:" which by-the-way, is a danger some of us see with some types of Abhidhamma thought...which walk a "tight-rope" in that area IMO. Anyway, to me Nagarjuna's teaching are philosophy and the Buddha's teachings are not. Buddha taught "pragmatic actuality" for the purpose of overcoming suffering. Nagarjuna taught a philosophy for the purpose of overcoming concepts. Without suffering being a major motivating factor of insight, I question whether Nagarjuna's method can have the power to uproot the defilements. Maybe it can, maybe it can't, but I'm putting my money on the Tipitika this 'go-round.' ;-) TG 39782 From: Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 5:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: latent tendencies. Hi, Nina - In a message dated 12/14/04 5:41:10 AM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: > When I say, > the latent tendencies do not arise, I do not mean they are unconditioned > like nibbana. It only means: they are dormant in the citta, do not come out, > but can condition the arising of akusala. > ------------------------------------------ Howard: Okay. I think you are saying that though they manifest as outflows, conditioning, as you say, akusala states, they, themselves, remain subliminal to ordinary awareness. That sounds right to me. They are deep seated tendencies. ------------------------------------- > Then, we have texts where the word arisen is used but in a specific sense. > See below. > >>See also Nyanponika, Abh Studies, p. 121, 122. > Nyanaponika: > (bhuumiladdhuppanna), that is, a fertile soil for the actual arising. This > applies to potential defilements (kilesa), which are in the > sense of possessing a fertile soil from which they may actually sprout when > other conditions for their arising are given...These potential defilements > may be compared to dangerous microbes infesting the body, which, though in a > latent state, may become active at any moment when the condiitons are > favorable...> > He then refers to the Abhidhamma texts: dhammas favorable to defilements, to > cankers, etc. > > H: As phenomena that truly exist, and latent tendencies are certainly > >such, and being other than nibbana, they should be subject to the > >moment-to-moment arising and ceasing that all other such realities are > subject > >to. > N: There is no store citta where they would stay. The middle has to be kept > between eternalism and annihilation. They are dhammas, not pa~n~natti. They > are powerful, they condition the arising of all sorts of akusala. > Where are they? Deeply engrained in each citta, even in kusala citta, > because cittas succeed one another from moment to moment and thus, all > experiences, all tendencies, good or bad, are accumulated from one moment to > the next. > ------------------------------------ Howard: Okay. So dependent on grasping or relinquishment, they can strengthen or weaken, from mindstate to mindstate. They are not ongoing "substances", but deep-seated phenomena that arise and fall, with varying strengths, as the stream of conciousness proceeds. ---------------------------------- We can verify this in life: citta falls away, but you can learn> > from what you experienced before. Good qualities can become good habits, and > bad ones bad habits. One may take a sip of a drink, and slowly one likes it > more and more, a new habit. One may tell just a little lie, and slowly one > gets into the habit of lying. The akusala citta falls away and more of that > type is added to the latent tendencies. Thus, these change all the time. > ---------------------------------- Howard: Good. :-) --------------------------------- > H: If one were to say that anusaya are deep-seated cetasikas that may > >be strengthened and weakened, but otherwise tenaciously replicate > themselves > >from moment to moment, and that manifest as outflowings, that would be an > >explanation that is sufficiently detailed and credible for me to "buy". > N: Is this not more or less what is said above? They do not replicate > themselves each moment, because there are also kusala cittas. > Because of the defilements that appear we know that there are these > underlying microbes that are with each citta arising and falling away in the > long, long stream of cittas, in the cycle of birth and death. > ------------------------------------- Howard: But if they are "underlying microbes that are with each citta arising and falling away," then they do replicate themselves each moment, do they not? (I don't mean *exact* replication.) -------------------------------- > As I explained to Mike, with the arising of each akusala citta, the > underlying sickness gets worse. But on the other hand, by wisdom they can > also wear out. > -------------------------------- Howard: Sounds right to me! ------------------------------- > I hope you and Mike will also ask again when there is anything not yet > cleared up. > Nina. > P.S. Rupa lasts as long as seventeen moments of citta: we cannot count but > it helps us to have more understanding of the process of cittas experiencing > a sense object that has not fallen away yet. It reminds us that very soon > after seeing defilements can arise on account of the sense object that is > still present. That objcet is not a concept. > ======================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39783 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 10:33am Subject: Dhamma Thread (178) Dear Dhamma Friends, In a life there are many cittas. But when each is thoroughly examined they can be characterized as this citta that citta and so on. Characterwise there are a total of 89 cittas or 121 cittas. These are just maximal typical cittas. All of these do not arise in any being. Even The Buddha in His Buddhahood or in His last life did not have all these cittas. These things in connection with beings will be discussed at some point. Currently we are discussing on functions of citta. In a life, there are many cittas. The first is patisandhi citta and the last is cuti citta. In between are bhavanga cittas as long as there there is no vithi cittas or conscious mind. In the previous post we were taking the example of sound object and ear-sense-base. Now sensuous object of sound arises. So there are going to arise vithi cittas. But 3 moments passed without being able to arise any vithi cittas for a given rupa ( sadda or sound object ) and sota pasada or ear-sense-base. So there left only 14 cittakkhana of rupa's life. All these 14 cittakkhana moments will be taken by each vithi citta one after another. They each perform their action or do their function. Primarily, 1. patisandhi citta doing patisandhi kicca or 'linking' function 2. bhavanga citta doing bhavanga kicca or 'life-continuum' function 3. cuti citta doing cuti kicca or 'last existing' or 'dying'function. Now as sensuous object arise, and vithi cittas have to arise, there are more functions of citta. 1. patisandhi citta/ kicca _linking 2. bhavanga citta/ kicca_life-continuum 3. avajjana citta/ kicca_adverting 4. cakkhuvinnana citta/ dasana kicca_seeing 5. sotavinnana citta/ savana kicca_hearing 6. ghanavinnana citta/ ghayana kicca_smelling 7. jivhavinnana citta/sayana kicca_tasting 8. kayavinnana citta/phusana kicca_touching 9. sampaticchana citta/ kicca_receiving 10.santirana citta/ kicca_investigating 11.votthapana citta/ votthapana kicca_determining 12.javana citta/ javana kicca_impulsion 13.tadarammana citta/ kicca_retention 14.cuti citta/ cuti kicca_dying/last existing function. These 14 functions are functions of citta. A life starts with the first citta and ends with cuti citta. In between are 2nd functioning cittas or bhavanga cittas as long as there is no vithi cittas. If a series of vithi citta arises they arise in the exact order. Unlike genes, physics and other science principles, these citta orders are always right. They never go wrong as in case of genes, going wrong of which causes cancers and many other diseases. Water does not always boils at 100 degree centigrades even though 99.999 % may boil at that temperature. But citta always follow it rules without ever breaking the law. Function 4 to 8 ( 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ) are 1. dasana kicca or seeing function 2. savana kicca or hearing function 3. ghayana kicca or smelling function 4. sayana kicca or tasting function 5. phusana kicca or touching function and all these 5 functions are related to sensuous plane. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39784 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 11:09am Subject: Dhamma Thread (179) Dear Dhamma Friends, A life has started. Now bhavanga cittas or life continueing consciousness are arising one after another without any intervening other kind of citta. Once there arise a loud and clear sound arises. This is a rupa. It is sadda or sound. It serves as arammana or object to cittas. Rupa 'sound' is an ultimate reality. Citta is a reality. These 2 realities are related through object condition. This condition is arammana or object condition. Rupa conditions nama which is a citta. This sound just has 17 cittakkhana. As soon as it arises, it cannot still serve as an object because it is still weak. But as it is a loud sound the middle 49 anukhana or 49 submoments become very strong object or very clear object. An example here is 'when a tungsten or wolfram wire' which is a kind of metal in mineralogy of geology is passed by electric current, there arises a bright light.' Just before glowing light there is a weak light in red colour because the light wave of red comes first in our visible eyes ( infra-red is invisible ). This is floowed by very bright white light. White light is a combination of 7 colours of light. At the end of the current, again there will be a weak light. You can test yourselves with weak batteries and light bulbs. When at its weakest stage of time ( out of 51 submoments ), rupa cannot serve as an object. But after one submoment, it appears well 'like above example' and serves as object. In terms of cittakkhana, one cittakkhana passes away. So rupa sound has left 16 cittakkhanas life. As it passes away, a bhavanga citta also passes away. Further 2 bhavanga citta have to pass away without vithi citta arising as explained in the previous post. So out of 17 moments, 3 moments have passed away. 14 moments left. At each of these 14 moments there arise each citta performing each function. As sound arises, sotapasada or ear-sense-base also arises at the same time and it also left 14 cittakkhana or 14 moments. At the end of these 14 moments both rupa sound and sotapasada will pass away. So there will not be possible to arise for vithi cittas. Instead bhavanga cittas have to arise immediately because there are still kamma. Still there are no javana citta at that time. But rupas have arisen. This is purejata paccaya or prenascent conditioning of dhamma. So in vithi vara, as soon as bhavanguppaccheda citta passes away, the first vithi citta arises is 'pancadvaravajjana citta'. This citta is avajjana citta. It does the job of avajjana or adverting. This is 'turning attention to' a particular object. Pancadvaravajjana does his job like shunting, turning to the right place. It contemplates on the object and chooses the right faculty of sense-base and adverts the object to a particular sense-base. As soon as bhavanga disappears, a citta arises. It is pancadvaravajjana. It just knows that there is an object. And then it advert the object to one of 5 sense faculties. This is the 3rd function of citta called avajjana kicca or adverting function. If arammana or object is 5 senses, then pancadvaravajjana citta arises. If arammana is dhammarammana or object of mind, then manodvaravajjana citta arises. They do the function of avajjana or adverting. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39785 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 11:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' Dear Sarah, I remember. Suan wrote about nibbaana and viññaa.na. Here, viññaa.na means: what can be known. Thus, in this context it is not consciousness. Nibbana can be known by the lokuttara citta which experiences it. Nina. op 14-12-2004 09:22 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...: > there are just two lines in the Tipitaka > which particularly have been used (some might say abused!) for much of the > Mahayana edifice and these kinds of ideas. One of these is the line about > luminous mind (AN1:10)just referred to in my letter to BB (see 'luminous' > in UP for more) and the other is the line where vinnana refers to nibbana > (and not consciousness) which was discussed in detail before. (I've just > forgotten the sutta, MN49, I think). Probably you'll find posts on it > under 'nibbana' or by searching for 'Anders'and 'vinnana' or 'nibbana' in > dsg.org 39786 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 11:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: D.O. Agrios. Dear Agrios and Sarah, I went through my file and cannot resist requoting a quote by Rob K who wrote a long article on it before. It really refers to basics here in order to have right understanding of D.O. We should not start the wrong way when we begin to study it. > > --- agriosinski wrote: >> >> Could I have your detailed explanation, in depth picture of what >> avija comes to be and how it leads, what exactly happens that sankharas >> arise. >> And then what sankhara is and how it leads to vinnana etc. etc. >> Or if you don't feel like writing about it, could you point me to >> the other source? 39787 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 11:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 133 ), lokuttara citta and dukkha. Dear Sarah, Very deep. Some may not know the term: the faculty of having known, aññaataavindriya: the faculty at the attainment of the fruition of the arahat. (I shall come to know what I did not know: at the magga-citta of the sotaapanna, the faculty of knowing: fruition of sotapanna) op 14-12-2004 10:27 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...: > But from a relative standpoint, since it is stated in the exposition of > the faculty of having known that it is a 'path factor and included in the > path', it is possible, in the case of the dhammas belonging to the fruit, > to include right view, etc, in the truth of the path, and the other > dhammas associated with the paths and fruits in the truth of suffering > because they share in the suffering constituted by conditioned formations. > When this is done the summarising of all also occurs in the teaching of > the truths." > .... > S: 'in the exposition of the faculty of having known that it is a 'path > factor and included in the path' > > I find this interesting in the light of KS's comment above. > saying this was because these cittas couldn't be known prior to being experienced N: Now only do I begin to understand this remark. This faculty is not experienced before it arises. But it is a difficult text. Nina. 39788 From: jwromeijn Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 11:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' And absabhava = pannatti ? --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > > Hello Joop, all, > > Have you read the 20 + posts in the Useful Posts under the > subject 'Sabhava (with essence, particular characteristic)': > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/ Dear Christine and KenO Dear Christine and KenO Thanks for the suggestion I read the most of the posts and I see that I repeated an old dsg- discussion The best answer to me came from Nina in message 27860 of Wed Dec 10, 2003 7:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: characteristics Nina (then): "Dear Michael, I am just wondering whether you see too much behind this term sabhava. Can it be a matter of translation? It just means: each dhamma has its own characteristic, and speaking of conditioned dhamma, it falls away immediately. No question of essentialism." Joop: My conclusion is that 'sabhava' should not be translated with 'self nature'. A translation even better than 'characteristics' that Nina uses, is 'properties' (like an electron had properties like electric charge, spin etc) And a unanswered question to me still is: WHY did the commentators introduce the word sabhava ? Metta Joop 39789 From: Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 6:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' In a message dated 12/14/2004 11:41:06 AM Pacific Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: Dear Sarah, I remember. Suan wrote about nibbaana and viññaa.na. Here, viññaa.na means: what can be known. Thus, in this context it is not consciousness. Nibbana can be known by the lokuttara citta which experiences it. Nina. Hi Nina Is there any realitivly "hard evidence" of this in the Suttas? Is this lokuttara citta one that arises upon reflection of Nibbana, or is it supposed to arise at the same time? If its supposed to arise at the same time, then I wonder what the source for this idea is? ... as it would seem to have a lot of conflicts with the Suttas. Also, I thought citta meant consciousness. It seems here that we have a non-consciousness consciousness. (Not a typo.) Thanks and I know the above does not necessarily represent your ideas. It seems to me, that based on overwhelming evidence from the Suttas, that Nibbana is the complete "relief" from experience and not some new type of experience. TG 39790 From: ericlonline Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 0:55pm Subject: Re: 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' Dear Group, > Christine> I have been reflecting on the saying that 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' and whether 'Nibbana is Conscious/ness'. I'd be interested to hear what anyone's thoughts are on this subject. Every dhamma is empty and non-self. Therefore samsara is nibbana. Seen from the desiring mind they are distinct. Seen from the one gone beyond desire they are the same. Do you see why this must be so? To try to describe nibbana in prose would be to say something like...it is pure awareness without a subject or object. No Buddha, No Dhamma, No Sangha, No form, No emptiness, etc. etc Only when all the known, as subject and object with their various names and forms, is negated can the unknown BE. PEACE E 39791 From: Egbert Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 0:59pm Subject: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi Sarah, KenO and all, Just by way of complement/contrast, modern science holds that hearing is the "first" sense, in that it is the first to develop in the womb, and the last to disappear in the final stages of death. (Rites for the dying all around the world acknowledge this fact) It is also considered the most immediate sense, in that there is no escaping sound. The eyes may be closed so that unwanted sights can be excluded, but no matter how one averts the head, sound is there. All the very best to you Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Ken O, > > Always happy to help out a fellow dinosaur who likes to quote from the > same text;-) thanks for the reminder - I had it marked, so easy to find: > 39792 From: Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 8:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' Hi, Eric - In a message dated 12/14/04 4:02:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, ericlonline@y... writes: > To try to describe nibbana in prose would be to say something > like...it is pure awareness without a subject or object. > > =================== But why say "awareness"? Awareness of what, if there is no object? I think that with regard to nibbana, to say anything is already to say too much. I sometimes want to say that nibbana is "that", or is "the real". But these don't really say anything, do they? Silence is best, I think. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39793 From: Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 8:15am Subject: Re: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi, Herman (and Sarah & Ken) - In a message dated 12/14/04 4:05:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, hhofman@t... writes: > Hi Sarah, KenO and all, > > Just by way of complement/contrast, modern science holds that > hearing is the "first" sense, in that it is the first to develop in > the womb, and the last to disappear in the final stages of death. > (Rites for the dying all around the world acknowledge this fact) > ----------------------------------- Howard: Yep. In that sense it is the alpha and the omega. (This makes me think of "In the beginning was the word." ;-) ----------------------------------- > > It is also considered the most immediate sense, in that there is no > escaping sound. The eyes may be closed so that unwanted sights can > be excluded, but no matter how one averts the head, sound is there. > ----------------------------------- Howard: But even with eyes shut, there is seeing. There are light images, colors etc, and there is darkness, and all that is still visual content. ------------------------------------ > > All the very best to you > > > Herman > ====================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39794 From: Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 9:45am Subject: Re: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. In a message dated 12/14/2004 1:18:54 PM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: Howard: But even with eyes shut, there is seeing. There are light images, colors etc, and there is darkness, and all that is still visual content. Hi Howard I've heard you say this a lot. I've spent considerable time in photographic "dark rooms," though not recently, my recollection is that they were "pitch black." In other cases, when light is present to some degree, and the eye lids are closed, light still can go through the lids and show up as faint visual impressions. I don't recall those impressions in the "dark room." Darkness to me is not seeing. Darkness is the abscence of seeing. (I'm not sure where you're coming from on this one.) With no light, there is nothing to see as there is no contact with visual object. Any analysis or interpretation that might arise due to darkness is a mind-object. That's the way I see it. TG 39795 From: Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 10:51am Subject: Re: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi, TG - In a message dated 12/14/04 5:50:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > Hi Howard > > I've heard you say this a lot. I've spent considerable time in photographic > > "dark rooms," though not recently, my recollection is that they were "pitch > black." > > In other cases, when light is present to some degree, and the eye lids are > closed, light still can go through the lids and show up as faint visual > impressions. I don't recall those impressions in the "dark room." > > Darkness to me is not seeing. Darkness is the abscence of seeing. (I'm not > > sure where you're coming from on this one.) With no light, there is nothing > > to see as there is no contact with visual object. Any analysis or > interpretation that might arise due to darkness is a mind-object. That's > the way I see it. > > TG > ======================== When I am not unconscious in a pitch black room, without an iota of light, and if it is a moment that I am neither hearing, tasting, touching, or experiencing mind-object, then I AM seeing - and the content is blackness. Only at a moment at which another sense door is active or there is a state of unconsciousness is there no seeing. If you go into a pitch black room and turn your attention to sight, you will be seeing blackness. If, instead, you turn your attention to temperature, you will momentarily be conscious via body-sense and will not be seeing, not blacknes nor any visual object. Also, whenever there is rapid change in conditions, consciousness may flit from one sense-door to another. For example, at a moment of intent listening to sound, though the lights be on, you will not be seeing, but should the room be suddenly plunged into pitch-black darkness, immediately you will no longer be hearing, but will be seeing, due to the mind adverting to the eye-door. Absence of seeing is not darkness. At an instant of hearing there is neither experience of darkness nor of light - there is no visual experience at all. This topic is an interesting one. Somehow I always feel obliged to "jump in"! ;-) However, I think it has little or no bearing on the matter of liberation. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39796 From: Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 3:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' And absabhava = pannatti ? Joop: "And a unanswered question to me still is: WHY did the commentators introduce the word sabhava ? " Hi Joop, One possible answer is that a concept/reality distinction was necessary in order to eradicate attachment to concepts. We can directly see that a reality is not graspable by witnessing its impermanence first hand. For example, happiness is a reality; it is a pleasant mental feeling. We can see this is ungraspable and therefore not truly desirable by seeing how quickly it arises and ceases. We can't say the same thing about a concept, such as a person, for example. Conventionally speaking, we say a person is born, lives for maybe 80 years and dies. This kind of impermanence is not going to discourage grasping. We have to see that a person is ultimately a relational being composed of many properties with countless relationships with the rest of the 'world' (also a concept). Because all a person is is this interrelatedness there isn't really anything there that could be experienced as a person in the same way as happiness can be experienced as happiness. This lack of an experiencable being is asabhava, no self-nature. It doesn't particularly have anything to do with impermanence. Sabhava (self-nature) is what is impermanent (nibbana is an exception). Larry 39797 From: kenhowardau Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:09pm Subject: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) Hi TG< I wrote: > Hi Larry and TG, > > If you explained the question carefully to a six-year-old, he would > tell you those things are impermanent. I have never heard anyone > claim otherwise. > > May I ask your views on the profundity of the Buddha's teaching? > What is it telling us that we don't already know? wrote, in part: You replied: ------------ > We may think we understand impermanence, even in a common sense manner, but we don't really. If we really understood it we would be arahats. > ------------------------ I think you will agree that we can endlessly develop our commonsense understanding of the world without ever becoming arahants (or sotapanna). ------------------------ TG: > The reason we don't understand impermanence is because we have a tendency to see things as permanent and bound with essence and substantiality. > ------------------------ To continue with my six-year-old's questioning: is a coffee cup permanent or impermanent? Assuming the answer is 'impermanent,' in what way is it impermanent? How long will it take to disappear? Can I see this impermanence directly, or can it only be deduced from various observations over time? --------------------------------- TG: > Although a mind might think it understands that all things are impermanent, the likelihood is that it still is plagued by permanence-view and self-view. Understanding impermanence is not the surface belief that things are impermanent. It is deep awareness of impermanence and of the sorrowful consequences of that condition. > ----------------------------------- Only at the most advanced stages of satipatthana is anicca directly understood. Until then, an intellectual understanding is the best we can hope for. To begin that intellectual understanding, we must learn the difference between concepts (which are merely ideas) and conditioned dhammas (which are realities with inherent characteristics (sabhava) including anicca). ----------------------------------- TG: > Repeatedly and consistently cultivating awareness of the impermanence of states can gradually breakdown misperceptions of permanence-view and self-view. This awareness is needed to detach the mind from clinging and grasping. > ----------------------------------- I think you are advising me to be aware of the same, banal impermanence that non-Dhamma students are aware of, but to do it more often. ---------------------------- TG: > If a mind understands the significance of impermanence, it won't crave and affliction will not result. The more impermanence is taught regarding whatever object is being considered, the more the mind inclines toward impermanence-view. --------------------------- Is that necessarily so? There is a popular saying to the effect you can't teach a man to stand on his own two feet by taking away the crutch he is leaning on. He will simply find another crutch. In other words, if you tell a man his world is impermanent and unsatisfactory, he will imagine another world - at the right hand of God - where everything lasts forever. The lesson, here, is that only right understanding (of conditioned dhammas) can turn mindfulness of impermanence into something profoundly beneficial. -------------------------------------------------- TG: > The "profundity" is not in determining what elements exist or don't exist. The profundity resides in breaking permanence-view, pleasurable-view, and self-view, and overcoming attachment. > ------------------------------------------------- What if we could directly see one of the dhammas (as distinct from a concept) that have arisen in the present moment? It wouldn't have to be a supramundane Path dhamma - any dhamma would do. It could be visible-object or audible-object: it could even be ignorance or aversion - who cares? Any dhamma is more than welcome as an object of right understanding! It is profoundly welcome! :-) -------------------- TG: > There are all sorts of methods taught by the Buddha to achieve that...as different methods appeal to different minds inclinations. > -------------------- Mmmm! Just about everyone thinks he has a technique for creating supramundane experiences. We are always assured that the techniques are found in the Tipitaka - somewhere - but they aren't! For anyone and everyone, right understanding is the only way. If the Buddha asked anything of us, it was simply that we listen, consider, and understand. --------------- TG: > The statement and question above are what might be expected from a non-Buddhists trying to grapple with their first experiences of the Buddha's teaching. Nothing provided in an e-mail is liable to drive forward the insight needed to resolve the issue in the mind of the questioner. A deep and consistent study of the Sutta Pitaka are needed to provide the potential needed to resolve the issues address above. Otherwise, they may never be understood. Since the Buddha did indeed spend a lot of time teaching the impermanence of what some describe as "conventional realities," I guess one needs to ask -- whether the Buddha was teaching six-year- olds, or whether there is something more to it! > ----------------- Very good - except you make no mention of the Abhidhamma and commentaries. That is a worry. When we go our own way - interpreting suttas according to our own experiences - we simply reinforce worldling preconceptions. Ken H 39798 From: plnao Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:09pm Subject: Re: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi James, and all > Sorry to have misquoted but I don't see a big difference > between "What are you seeing now?" and "Is there seeing now?" The > second is simply crouched in politically correct non-atta terms. I think there is a big difference. And if you think about it you will too. Obviously, "what are you seeing now?" is the the thing seen, and "is there seeing now?" is the seeing-consciouness. (or "eye-consciousness" as translator below puts it) You said a while back that you think knowing the difference between nama and rupa is a very basic thing but unless you wrote the above without thinking carefully, you had better go back to square one on rupa and nama! I'm sure you've read the Fire Sutta: "The eye is burning, forms are burning, eye-consciousness is burning, eye-contact is burning" Phil : Which of the above are nama and which are rupa? Do you see the difference between those two questions now? "also whatever is felt as pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant that arises with eye-contact for its indispensable condition, that too is burning. Burning with what? Burning with the fire of lust, with the fire of hate, with the fire of delusion. I say it is burning with birth, aging and death, with sorrows, with lamentations, with pains, with griefs, with despairs." Phil: People here have said that "the flavour of Abhidhamma is anatta." To me these days, it seems the flavour of Dhamma in general is burning! Proliferation. Effluents. All this lunging and leaping and slithering of the mind in pursuit of objects and thoughts that please, all this mental movement that represents the strengthening of the roots of lust, hate and delusion. K Sujin is just one of many Dhamma teachers who help us in one of many different ways to see into this process. Her question is very helpful for this reason, though since as you say it is a bit like a koan it can be helpful to different people in different ways. For me, it helps in understanding proliferation. For others it will help in different ways. On with the sutta: "Bhikkhus, when a noble follower who has heard (the truth) sees thus, he finds estrangement in the eye, finds estrangement in forms, finds estrangement in eye-consciousness, finds estrangement in eye-contact, and whatever is felt as pleasant or painful or neither-painful- nor-pleasant that arises with eye-contact for its indispensable condition, in that too he finds estrangement. Estrangement in the eye. Cooling. Cessation. The fire begins to die down. It won't go out for many lifetimes, in all probability, but it is already dying down, moment by moment, thanks to thoughtful and patient consideration of Dhamma. > But, you have delighted me with your two posts on this question > because you have proven my point: The question is silly! ;-) I wonder if you still think so? >If you think about this question deeply, in every possible aspect, you will > soon come to the conclusion that there isn't an answer. And I say to you that if you think about it, you'll see that there is. Reflect on the Fire Sutta. Reflect on the Honeyball Sutta. Reflect on any number of suttas that deal with the sense doors. Most importantly, reflect on your own experience. Perhaps you will come to take note, as I did, of the way you find that your eye has locked on certain objects, and that it does so consistently, and not on others. In my case, it is women, and for me it is irrefutable evidence of proliferation that has already ocurred when the conventionally-insighted person would say "I see a woman." The difference between finding that one is looking at something and has seen something. "See" is never used in the progressive continuous tense. We never say "I am seeing." - but perhaps we should, because it better gets at how quickly seeing is rising and falling away, beyond our control. K Sujin's question helps us understand this. Well, it helped me! Metta, Phil 39799 From: Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 0:01pm Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) In a message dated 12/14/2004 4:14:17 PM Pacific Standard Time, kenhowardau@y... writes: To continue with my six-year-old's questioning: is a coffee cup permanent or impermanent? Assuming the answer is 'impermanent,' in what way is it impermanent? How long will it take to disappear? Can I see this impermanence directly, or can it only be deduced from various observations over time? TG These are good topics to resolve. Only at the most advanced stages of satipatthana is anicca directly understood. Until then, an intellectual understanding is the best we can hope for. To begin that intellectual understanding, we must learn the difference between concepts (which are merely ideas) and conditioned dhammas (which are realities with inherent characteristics (sabhava) including anicca). TG If this were the crucial case you think it is, i.e., distinguishing between concepts and conditional states, it would be a mystery to me why in over 10,000 pages of Sutta material, no one recorded the Buddha saying such. It would be one of the easiest things to remember. ----------------------------------- TG: > Repeatedly and consistently cultivating awareness of the impermanence of states can gradually breakdown misperceptions of permanence-view and self-view. This awareness is needed to detach the mind from clinging and grasping. > ----------------------------------- I think you are advising me to be aware of the same, banal impermanence that non-Dhamma students are aware of, but to do it more often. TG Many such 'banal' examples permeate the Suttas. (Must have been those six-year-olds the Buddha was teaching.) ---------------------------- TG: > If a mind understands the significance of impermanence, it won't crave and affliction will not result. The more impermanence is taught regarding whatever object is being considered, the more the mind inclines toward impermanence-view. --------------------------- Is that necessarily so? There is a popular saying to the effect you can't teach a man to stand on his own two feet by taking away the crutch he is leaning on. He will simply find another crutch. In other words, if you tell a man his world is impermanent and unsatisfactory, he will imagine another world - at the right hand of God - where everything lasts forever. TG Yes, it is necessarily so. :-) -------------------------------------------------- TG: > The "profundity" is not in determining what elements exist or don't exist. The profundity resides in breaking permanence-view, pleasurable-view, and self-view, and overcoming attachment. > ------------------------------------------------- What if we could directly see one of the dhammas (as distinct from a concept) that have arisen in the present moment? It wouldn't have to be a supramundane Path dhamma - any dhamma would do. It could be visible-object or audible-object: it could even be ignorance or aversion - who cares? Any dhamma is more than welcome as an object of right understanding! It is profoundly welcome! :-) TG I agree with that basically, except for the concept comment. I don't see concepts the way you apparently do. I see them as mind-objects. Since the Buddha did indeed spend a lot of time teaching the impermanence of what some describe as "conventional realities," I guess one needs to ask -- whether the Buddha was teaching six-year- olds, or whether there is something more to it! > ----------------- Very good - except you make no mention of the Abhidhamma and commentaries. That is a worry. When we go our own way - interpreting suttas according to our own experiences - we simply reinforce worldling preconceptions. TG I've spent years studying the Abhidhamma and contrary to what some people might think, I consider it beneficial. I've even read the Visuddhimagga cover to cover about 10 times...that's not too shabby. And it even has a couple of pages that instruct on how to practice as I recall. ;-) (Of course that doesn't mean I understood a lick of it.) I primarily use Suttas as examples because I consider them the "prime authority." Ken H TG 39800 From: Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 0:23pm Subject: Re: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. In a message dated 12/14/2004 3:55:00 PM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: Hi, TG - In a message dated 12/14/04 5:50:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > Hi Howard > > I've heard you say this a lot. I've spent considerable time in photographic > > "dark rooms," though not recently, my recollection is that they were "pitch > black." > > In other cases, when light is present to some degree, and the eye lids are > closed, light still can go through the lids and show up as faint visual > impressions. I don't recall those impressions in the "dark room." > > Darkness to me is not seeing. Darkness is the abscence of seeing. (I'm not > > sure where you're coming from on this one.) With no light, there is nothing > > to see as there is no contact with visual object. Any analysis or > interpretation that might arise due to darkness is a mind-object. That's > the way I see it. > > TG > ======================== When I am not unconscious in a pitch black room, without an iota of light, and if it is a moment that I am neither hearing, tasting, touching, or experiencing mind-object, then I AM seeing - and the content is blackness. Hi Howard The lack-of-contact as a cause for experience? I don't know what you're taking but ship some out my way would ya? ;-) TG 39801 From: Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 1:29pm Subject: Re: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi, TG - In a message dated 12/14/04 8:30:53 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > Hi Howard > > The lack-of-contact as a cause for experience? I don't know what you're > taking but ship some out my way would ya? ;-) > > TG > ========================= Yeah, it's on the way, TG. Very good "stuff". I got into it when I gave up materialism and found the Buddha connection! ;-)) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39802 From: AlanLam Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 6:43pm Subject: Re: Hello. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarahprocterabbott" wrote: > > Hi Alan, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Alan Lam > wrote: > > > > Hi, I am a newbie here. Hope to learn from all of you. > > Thanks in advance and Metta. Alan > > > ... > > I'm glad you've made it here! I know we can all learn a lot from you > and your keen interest in the Dhamma too. > > With regard to your other message, unfortunately the list doesn't > accept attachments, so would you mind re-sending it as text in a > message? Many thanks in advance. > > I'd also be especially glad to hear where you live and anything > about your background interest in the Teachings. > > Metta, > > Sarah > p.s look forward to further discussion on the 'Jhana and Lay > Disciple' thread.... apologies for any delays in advance. > ========================== Hi, Sarah, Thanks indeed for your warmth. Noted message do not accept attachement. I am from here Bangkok itself and noted that the founder of this website being the Aunt (Khun Sujin) of a close friend. I am a Buddhist just like any of the readers here and look forward to learn from them. With best regards and Metta. Alan 39803 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 10:15pm Subject: Concept and Reality/Rob M. Friend Rob M., Good News! I got the book that you mailed to me: Concept and Reality; in Early Buddhist Thought by Bhikkhu Nanananda. I was surprised to get it so fast because the mail in Egypt is practically non-existent (I don't even have a mailbox!). It was the first time in a year that I have seen a mailman! ;-)) Anyway, thanks a lot and I will give it a read and post my impressions. Metta, James 39804 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 10:34pm Subject: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Friend Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "plnao" wrote: > Hi James, and all > > > Sorry to have misquoted but I don't see a big difference > > between "What are you seeing now?" and "Is there seeing now?" The > > second is simply crouched in politically correct non-atta terms. > > I think there is a big difference. And if you think about it you will too. > Obviously, "what are you seeing now?" is the the thing seen, and "is there > seeing now?" > is the seeing-consciouness. (or "eye-consciousness" as translator below puts > it) You said a while back that you think knowing the difference > between nama and rupa is a very basic thing but unless you wrote the above > without > thinking carefully, you had better go back to square one on rupa and nama! Oh, thank you so much for pointing out my apparent stupidity! Or, sa my father would say, "Boy, you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground!" LOL! > > I'm sure you've read the Fire Sutta: > > "The eye is burning, forms are burning, eye-consciousness is burning, > eye-contact is burning" > > Phil : Which of the above are nama and which are rupa? Do you see the > difference between those > two questions now? Ah...ah...ah...next question please. ;-) > > "also whatever is felt as pleasant or painful or > neither-painful-nor-pleasant that arises with eye-contact for its > indispensable condition, that too is burning. Burning with what? Burning > with the fire of lust, with the fire of hate, with the fire of delusion. I > say it is burning with birth, aging and death, with sorrows, with > lamentations, with pains, with griefs, with despairs." > > Phil: People here have said that "the flavour of Abhidhamma is anatta." To > me these days, it seems the flavour > of Dhamma in general is burning! Proliferation. Effluents. All this lunging > and leaping and slithering of the mind > in pursuit of objects and thoughts that please, all this mental movement > that represents the strengthening > of the roots of lust, hate and delusion. Now you're speaking my language!! > > K Sujin is just one of many Dhamma teachers who help us in one of many > different ways to see into > this process. Her question is very helpful for this reason, though since as > you say it is a bit like a koan > it can be helpful to different people in different ways. For me, it helps in > understanding proliferation. For others > it will help in different ways. I agree, as I said she just doesn't do anything for me. If she increases your understanding, or if you believe that she does, good for you! > > On with the sutta: > > "Bhikkhus, when a noble follower who has heard (the truth) sees thus, he > finds estrangement in the eye, finds estrangement in forms, finds > estrangement in eye-consciousness, finds estrangement in eye- contact, and > whatever is felt as pleasant or painful or neither-painful- nor- pleasant > that arises with eye-contact for its indispensable condition, in that too he > finds estrangement. > > Estrangement in the eye. Cooling. Cessation. The fire begins to die down. It > won't go out for many lifetimes, in all probability, but it is already > dying down, moment by moment, thanks to thoughtful and patient consideration > of Dhamma. > > > But, you have delighted me with your two posts on this question > > because you have proven my point: The question is silly! ;-) > > I wonder if you still think so? What do you think? > > >If you think about this question deeply, in every possible aspect, you > will > > soon come to the conclusion that there isn't an answer. > > And I say to you that if you think about it, you'll see that there is. > Reflect on the > Fire Sutta. Reflect on the Honeyball Sutta. Reflect on any number of suttas > that deal with the sense doors. Most importantly, reflect on your own > experience. Preach it brother! Preach it! ;-) (just kidding). > Perhaps you will come to take note, as I did, of the way you find that your > eye > has locked on certain objects, and that it does so consistently, and not on > others. > In my case, it is women, Me too!! ;-))))))))) and for me it is irrefutable evidence of > proliferation that has already ocurred > when the conventionally-insighted person would say "I see a woman." The > difference between finding that > one is looking at something and has seen something. > > "See" is never used in the progressive continuous tense. > We never say "I am seeing." - but perhaps we should, because it better gets > at how quickly seeing > is rising and falling away, beyond our control. Good points. I have a question for you, which I have been thinking about recently: Of the Noble Eightfold Path, is Right View "right seeing" or is it something else? > > K Sujin's question helps us understand this. Well, it helped me! Great! > > Metta, > Phil Metta, James 39805 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 0:03am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 74- Volition/cetanaa (d) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.4 Volition(cetanaa]contd] ***** As regards the manifestation of cetanå which is directing, the Atthasåliní compares cetanå with the chief disciple who recites his own lessons and makes the other pupils recite their lessons as well, with the chief carpenter who does his own work and makes the other carpenters do their work, or with the general who fights himself and makes the other soldiers take part in the battle, “…for when he begins, the others follow his example. Even so, when volition starts work on its object, it sets associated states to do each its own.“ The cetanå which accompanies vipåkacitta and kiriyacitta merely coordinates the tasks of the other dhammas it accompanies, it does not ‘will’ kusala or akusala and it does not motivate wholesome or unwholesome deeds. For example, seeing-consciousness, which is vipåkacitta, the result of kamma, is accompanied by cetanå and this cetanå is also vipåka. The cetanå which accompanies seeing-consciousness directs the tasks which the accompanying dhammas have to fulfil with regard to visible object. It directs, for example, phassa which contacts visible object, vedanå which feels and saññå which marks and remembers visible object. ***** [Ch.4 Volition(cetanaa) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 39806 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 0:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Letter to B.Bodhi-'The Jhânas and the Lay Disciple ..' Dear Joop, I appreciate your input and deep reflections on different topics. Honestly speaking, I don’t know what an ‘orthodox Theravadan view’ is. We’re all just groping in the dark most the time in our unorthodox ways. As Howard would say we just pick out useful reminders here and there which we can discuss and learn from. We were reminded in India not to cling to particular texts and materials, but we can just test out what is right according to our limited understanding and leave those parts of the texts which are beyond our wisdom to appreciate for now. Can we say that only the ariyans have an ‘orthodox view’ without any wrong views clouding the issues? Why did the commentators use ‘sabhava’? I don’t know but let me repeat Nina’s comment which you liked: “I am just wondering whether you see too much behind this term sabhava…….It just means: each dhamma has its own characteristic, and speaking of conditioned dhamma, it falls away immediately. No question of essentialism.” Why don’t we use the same English language as Shakespeare? Simply, language and ways of explanation evolve. I don’t attach any great significance to differences in language between the commentaries and the Nikayas, for example. Language is merely a tool to communicate. Back to this thread. Thanks for your input here: --- jwromeijn wrote: > > I like this thread Sarah, because it touches one of the themes that > occupy me: is doing insight-meditation enough or had I also to reach > jhana concentration ? > (Enough for what ? For getting enlightened; the term I prefer) …. S: I see people posing this question often, but I ‘m not sure it’s valid. (I can elaborate further, but won’t for now). …. > Two questions: > In the article of Bhikkhu Bodhi the 'right concentration' as one of > the parts of the eightfold path is mentioned many times. The 'right > mindfulness' (samma sati) not at all. > And it is this 'right mindfulness' that plays a central role in the > so called insight meditation (also called in Europe 'vipassana'), > based on the Satapathana Sutta > I don't understand why 'right mindfulness' is not mentioned; to > me 'right concentration' is not more important (for getting > enlightenend) than 'right mindfulness'? …. S: Good point. Without any right mindfulness or awareness (samma sati) , there won’t be any samma Samadhi. And there won’t be any samma sati arising without a clear comprehension of the objects of samma sati or of what it is. This is why in the Satipatthana Sutta we always read about sati-sampajanna (right awareness and understanding) together. The other factors of the fivefold or eightfold path are also implied. …. > The second question: the article of BB is about lay-people. But we > are talking about fundamental things; and social-spiritual roles like > being a monk, a nun or a layman/laywoman doesn't play a role at that > level ? …. S: Yes, I agree with you. Cittas don’t discriminate between whether one is a male or female, a monk or a layman or woman. In other words, when it comes to the development of satipatthana, the path is the same for all – one path, consisting of the various path factors. No monk or layperson involved. …. > PS the Pali-terms were no problem: I skip them when I don't recognize > them, thinking: "Pali-words are just words, and words are symbols, > and symbols are concepts." …. S: This was a kind comment. I think it’s natural to adjust one’s language or terminology according to who one is addressing. So, I try to avoid Pali as much as possible if I’m writing to friends who are likely to be put off by it and use it more for particular terms if I’m responding to someone who prefers to use Pali expressions. Btw, what do you mean by insight and insight meditation ? Metta, Sarah ======= 39807 From: jwromeijn Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 0:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' And absabhava = pannatti ? Hi, Larry In fact you explain the function of 'asabhava', and the existence of the word 'sabhava' only as a consequence. Sounds logic, but I'm not sure that was the historical reason. But that is a kind of problem I can forget. Thanks Metta Joop --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > Joop: "And a unanswered question to me still is: WHY did the > commentators introduce the word sabhava ? " > > Hi Joop, > > One possible answer is that a concept/reality distinction was necessary > in order to eradicate attachment to concepts. We can directly see that a > reality is not graspable by witnessing its impermanence first hand. For > example, happiness is a reality; it is a pleasant mental feeling. We can > see this is ungraspable and therefore not truly desirable by seeing how > quickly it arises and ceases. We can't say the same thing about a > concept, such as a person, for example. Conventionally speaking, we say > a person is born, lives for maybe 80 years and dies. This kind of > impermanence is not going to discourage grasping. We have to see that a > person is ultimately a relational being composed of many properties with > countless relationships with the rest of the 'world' (also a concept). > Because all a person is is this interrelatedness there isn't really > anything there that could be experienced as a person in the same way as > happiness can be experienced as happiness. This lack of an experiencable > being is asabhava, no self-nature. It doesn't particularly have anything > to do with impermanence. Sabhava (self-nature) is what is impermanent > (nibbana is an exception). > > Larry 39808 From: AlanLam Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 2:38am Subject: [dsg] Re: Letter to B.Bodhi-'The Jhânas and the Lay Disciple ..' --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Dear Joop, > > I appreciate your input and deep reflections on different topics. Honestly > speaking, I don't know what an `orthodox Theravadan view' is. We're all > just groping in the dark most the time in our unorthodox ways. As Howard > would say we just pick out useful reminders here and there which we can > discuss and learn from. We were reminded in India not to cling to > particular texts and materials, but we can just test out what is right > according to our limited understanding and leave those parts of the texts > which are beyond our wisdom to appreciate for now. Can we say that only > the ariyans have an `orthodox view' without any wrong views clouding the > issues? > > Why did the commentators use `sabhava'? I don't know but let me repeat > Nina's comment which you liked: > > "I am just wondering whether you see too much behind this term > sabhava…….It just means: each dhamma has its own characteristic, and > speaking of conditioned dhamma, it falls away immediately. No question of > essentialism." > > Why don't we use the same English language as Shakespeare? Simply, > language and ways of explanation evolve. I don't attach any great > significance to differences in language between the commentaries and the > Nikayas, for example. Language is merely a tool to communicate. > > Back to this thread. Thanks for your input here: > > --- jwromeijn wrote: > > > > I like this thread Sarah, because it touches one of the themes that > > occupy me: is doing insight-meditation enough or had I also to reach > > jhana concentration ? > > (Enough for what ? For getting enlightened; the term I prefer) > …. > S: I see people posing this question often, but I `m not sure it's valid. > (I can elaborate further, but won't for now). > …. > > Two questions: > > In the article of Bhikkhu Bodhi the 'right concentration' as one of > > the parts of the eightfold path is mentioned many times. The 'right > > mindfulness' (samma sati) not at all. > > And it is this 'right mindfulness' that plays a central role in the > > so called insight meditation (also called in Europe 'vipassana'), > > based on the Satapathana Sutta > > I don't understand why 'right mindfulness' is not mentioned; to > > me 'right concentration' is not more important (for getting > > enlightenend) than 'right mindfulness'? > …. > S: Good point. Without any right mindfulness or awareness (samma sati) , > there won't be any samma Samadhi. And there won't be any samma sati > arising without a clear comprehension of the objects of samma sati or of > what it is. This is why in the Satipatthana Sutta we always read about > sati-sampajanna (right awareness and understanding) together. The other > factors of the fivefold or eightfold path are also implied. > …. > > The second question: the article of BB is about lay-people. But we > > are talking about fundamental things; and social-spiritual roles like > > being a monk, a nun or a layman/laywoman doesn't play a role at that > > level ? > …. > S: Yes, I agree with you. Cittas don't discriminate between whether one is > a male or female, a monk or a layman or woman. In other words, when it > comes to the development of satipatthana, the path is the same for all – > one path, consisting of the various path factors. No monk or layperson > involved. > …. > > PS the Pali-terms were no problem: I skip them when I don't recognize > > them, thinking: "Pali-words are just words, and words are symbols, > > and symbols are concepts." > …. > S: This was a kind comment. I think it's natural to adjust one's language > or terminology according to who one is addressing. So, I try to avoid Pali > as much as possible if I'm writing to friends who are likely to be put off > by it and use it more for particular terms if I'm responding to someone > who prefers to use Pali expressions. > > Btw, what do you mean by insight and insight meditation ? > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======= Hi jwromeijn, Your question on "doing insight-meditation enough or having to reach jhana ?". For Vipassana Meditation or Insight Meditation, it is better to have jhana state of mind first and then change track like a railway line, to Vipassana. Without jhana state what one contemplates is just mundane or relative truth only. Whereas when one reaches the jhana stage (be it 1st, 2nd, 3rd or 4th), when contemplating the dharma factors, one contemplating the supra-mundane or ultimate truth. The General of meditation Ven. MahaMogallana having reached the 4th jhana stage and contemplate the Dharma factors (the 6-fold sense objects or the 5 objects of craving). That's why he is the one with the best magical powers of all Arhats then. However, irrespective of whichever jhana stage, when one cut off rebirth, the nibanna is the same. However, the Ven. Mahasi of Burma teaches Vipassana with "Access Concentration" or "Entering Concentration" which is excellent for beginners with just enough concentration, before reaching jhana, to use for contemplation of Dharma factors. When one progresses then diligently, one could achieve jhana state then. hana is like the mercury of the thermometer, it goes up and down. Hence, for beginners, one will not achieve jhana state each and every time when one meditates. Howver, constancy is the key to success. One should promise oneself not to miss even one day's meditation irrespective even if one were on travel. One will progress very well then. Today, many Vipassana meditator used to query as to why the Sathipathana Sutta promised if not 7 day, but 7 months and yet why still one do not achieve "Stream Enterer". The problem lies with one who did the Vipassana but forgot the 8 fold noble path, still with harsh words etc. as today's society is much more complex than those Buddha's day. During the Buddha's time, should one were to leave home to become a Bhikkhu and hold the full precepts, it is like one pulling a 'Rubber-Band" just 8 inches apart and then release it. One do not get the pain from the elastic band hitting on one's hand. As the society then was very simple without much comfort or distraction. However, today, should one wish then to renounce and become a Bhikkhu, it will be like one pulling the "Rubber-Band" 18 inches apart. When relaesed, it snapped and sharp pain will be felt. Yet, here we do not mention the holding of the full monk's vinaya then. I sincerely hope my above view do met with your kind acceptance and should you have a clearer concept, please do comment so that I could learn it too. Thanking you. Kindest regards and Metta. Alan 39809 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 3:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] The jhaanas and the Lay Disciples Dear Alan, I’m not sure I’ll be able to do justice to your comments, but let’s see. I assure you that my ‘command’ of any of the texts is very limited indeed! First of all, let me quote from BB’s article and then my comments to help me revisit the context. I apologise for the length of this post as a consequence. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/34202 The Stream-enterer and Jhaana (3) BB:>Since the lay stream-enterer or once-returner is thus well equipped with the wisdom of insight but is not typically described as a jhaana attainer, this implies that attainment of jhaana is not normally expected or required of him. From this we can also conclude that at these early stages of the path liberative wisdom does not depend on a supporting base of jhaana. >(5) A text in the Sotaapatti-sa.myutta gives credit to this conclusion. At SN 55:40/V 398–99, the Buddha explains to the Sakyan Nandiya how a noble disciple dwells diligently (ariyasaavako appamaadavihaarii). He says that a noble disciple should not become complacent about possessing the four factors of stream-entry but should use these qualities as starting points for contemplation: "He is not content with his confirmed confidence in the Buddha (etc.), but strives further in seclusion by day and in retreat by night. As he dwells diligently, gladness arises ... (as above) ... for one who is happy the mind becomes concentrated. When the mind is concentrated, phenomena become manifest. It is with the manifestation of phenomena to him that he is reckoned as 'one who dwells diligently.'"[31] >The expression "manifestation of phenomena" (dhammaana.m paatubhaava) indicates that the disciple is engaged in contemplating the rise and fall of the five aggregates, the six sense bases, and so forth. Thus this passage shows how the disciple proceeds from concentration to insight, but it does not describe this concentration in terms suggesting it occurs at the level of jhaana. Since the sequence switches over from concentration to insight without mentioning jhaana, it seems that the concentration attained will be tantamount to access concentration, not jhaana, yet even this suffices to support the arising of insight. …. S: Actually, this is a very interesting sutta. We are inclined to think that on reaching sotapatti magga, the work is done, but here we read a description of the nble disciple ‘who dwells negligently’ and the one ‘who dwells diligently’. I wrote: S:>7.In an earlier section of the article under ‘The Stream-enterer and Jhaana’, you refer to SN 55:40. ‘When the mind is concentrated, phenomena become manifest….’Panna and Samadhi surely condition each other and arise together in the development of satipatthana. Indeed, at [and subsequent to] stages of vipassana ~nana, they are ‘yoked’ together (yuganaddha) because of the clarity at such times. The object is so clear at such times that the samadhi is apparent.This contrasts with the beginning of satipatthana, otherwise there’s no different level. However, even at vipassana ~nana [and subsequently], it must be khanika samadhi, not appanaa (access) as I believe you suggest. The objects of the samadhi and panna are still characteristics of reality (i.e 4 foundations of mindfulness). …. S: Actually, here it is the sotapanna’s wisdom being described with panna and samadhi clearly yoked together. Also see 35:97. Now to some of your comments: --- AlanLam wrote: > SN55.40/V398-99 > > Quote : He is content with his confirmed confidence in the Buddha > (etc.). But strives further in seclusion by day and in retreat by night. > As > he dwells diligently, gladness arises (as above)... for one who is happy > > the mind becomes concentrated. When the mind is concentrated, > phenomena become manifest. It is with manifestation of phenomena to > him that he is reckoned as "one who dwells diligently". (31). Unquote. > Here please allow me to address the above point by point as follows; > > "But strives further in seclusion by day" : "strives" could mean > he "energetically meditated" in seclusion by day. Buddha always remind > his disciples to stay in meditation in seclusions, i.e. in a forest > under the > tree or in empty building ….. S: See 35:97 under sa.laayatanasa.myutta. We’re discussing the development of insight and as I said, at higher stages, samadhi and vipassana are yoked together, conditioning each other. I’m not sure that the use of seclusion is physical seclusion here as you indicate. Seclusion or (pa)viveka can refer to bodily or mental seclusion. We read elsewhere about viveka-sukha, the happiness of seclusion/detachment or enlightenment. We’d need to look at all the terms very carefully here. Strives or vaayamati (I think) as in samma vaayaamo (right effort). Meditates or jaayati as in develops samatha and vipassana. Dwells diligently (appamaadavihaarii hoti). Perhaps someone with more Pali knowledge can help further. 31. SN V 398–99: Idha Nandiya ariyasaavako Buddhe aveccappasaadena samannaagato hoti ... So tena Buddhe aveccappasaadena asantu.t.tho uttari.m vaayamati divaa pavivekaaya ratti.m pa.tisallaanaaya. Tassa eva.m appamattassa viharato paamujja.m jaayati ... sukhino citta.m samaadhiyati. Samaahite citte dhammaa paatubhavanti. Dhammaana.m paatubhaavaa appamaadavihaarii tveva sa,nkha.m gacchati.... Eva.m kho Nandiya ariyasaavako appamaadavihaarii hoti > ….. > "in retreat by night". : "retreat" always mean "meditation practise in > seclusions" without disturbance. And retreat could also mean "working > very ernestly in meditation". It is a full time meditation process > during a > retreat. > > Hence, here it should mean that he is "in strict and diligent meditation > > by day and by night". Working ernestly hard in meditation. …. S: BB gives ‘seclusion at night’ and as I say, viveka can refer to mental detachment (citta viveka), detachment from sensuous objects. Pls see ‘solitude’ or ‘seclusion’ in Useful Posts if you have time. …. > "As he dwells diligently, gladness arises" : "dwell" here could > mean "engrossed", "fully concentrated" and "energetically meditating", > lasting for a period of time. > > "gladness arises" : Here "gladness" is a distinct mark called "piti" > or "raptures". For one who ernestly meditates and achieving a state of > continuous samadhi djyana, there will be stages of piti or raptures, …. S: Also, there can be great piti with insight or higher wisdom. … <…> > Hence, here he has achived samadhi djyana state and thus NOT, I > would like to repeat, NOT "Access Concentration" and or "Entering > Concentration" as you have commented. As either of the two (2) > (Access or Entering Concentration) does not and will not, come with the > mark of piti or raptures. Only prolonged djyana does have this mark of > piti/raptures. …. S: I appreciate your logical conclusions, but as BB stated, I don’t think this is necessarily the case. There is no mention of jhana here. BB mentioned access concentration but I’m not convinced of this as I wrote in my comments above. I believe the entire sutta is about the development of higher and higher insights. The neglighent sotapanna is the one that is not developing the further wisdom which leads to higher ariyan states surely? Satipatthana and insights are accompanied by khanika samadhi …. > > I would then greatly appreciate if you could again please cross-check > and advise if you do agree to the above analysis. ….. S: Alan, we have plenty to discuss here. As I say, my knowledge is very limited and I’ll be glad for any assistance or correction. Maybe some of our Pali experts will also be able to help a little or if anyone has access to the commentary. Please keep discussing all these terms. It’s very interesting and I can learn from it. As I say, sometimes I’m slow to respond, so don’t be deterred. Metta, Sarah p.s So you live in Bkk and know one of K.Sujin’s nephews or nieces?? I knew all her nieces and nephews when they were young and used to visit the house where she lived with her father, as I used to stay there when I visited Bkk. Have you ever visited the Foundation? A couple of our members here like Sukin and Betty go regularly to the Saturday afternoon English discussions. Recommended! You may also like to listen to the audio tapes we’ve edited and uploaded. Many of these points are raised on them (Patna Board Room and Lumbini discussions from memory). http://www.dhammastudygroup.org/ ============================================== 39810 From: buddhatrue Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 4:42am Subject: Concept and Reality/ Rob M Friend Rob M. and all, I have begun to read the book `Concept and Reality' and I wanted to give an update. It is a very rich book, packed with details, and I don't think that just one update would do it justice. Therefore, I will give some updates as I am inspired during my reading. I agree with the central thesis of the author which states, in brief, that mental (or conceptual) proliferation will befall the worldling in a `subject-object' manner predominately due to the tyranny of language combined with the limitations of the sensory apparatus. It cannot be emphasized enough that words and thoughts have a symbiotic relationship and because language is so `public' and apparently stable, mental proliferation with link conceptualization of the past, present, and future to create a web and a trap of `subject-object' duality. This is the very beginning of the creation of the ego. From the Honeyball Sutta: Dependent on eye & forms, eye-consciousness arises. The meeting of the three is contact. With contact as a requisite condition, there is feeling. What one feels, one perceives (labels in the mind). What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one complicates. Based on what a person complicates, the perceptions & categories of complication assail him/her with regard to past, present, & future forms cognizable via the eye. "Dependent on ear & sounds, ear-consciousness arises... "Dependent on nose & aromas, nose-consciousness arises... "Dependent on tongue & flavors, tongue-consciousness arises... "Dependent on body & tactile sensations, body-consciousness arises... "Dependent on intellect & ideas, intellect-consciousness arises. The meeting of the three is contact. With contact as a requisite condition, there is feeling. What one feels, one perceives (labels in the mind). What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one complicates. Based on what a person complicates, the perceptions & categories of complication assail him/her with regard to past, present, & future ideas cognizable via the intellect." http://www.seattleinsight.org/sutta.aspx?id=6 The author then goes on to explain that, unfortunately, Buddhaghosa in his commentaries ignores the symbiotic relationship between conceptualization and language, directly revealed in the syntax of the teachings themselves, and instead chooses to focus on the reasoning of concepts. This breaks down and compartmentalizes the dependent origination aspect so essential in the Buddha's original teaching. My conclusion from this reading: those who strictly adhere to the viewpoint of Buddhaghosa and his commentaries will emphasize the danger in concepts themselves rather than the danger in the process of conceptualization leading to the proliferation of conceptualization. I believe that this difference in viewpoint is revealed so strikingly in the debates we so often see in DSG. Additionally, I believe it is very important for the Buddhist to have a critical awareness of how language influences thought and vice versa. Metta, James 39811 From: plnao Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 5:29am Subject: Re: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi James, and all Well, James, I must admit I was afraid you'd get snorky in response to those corrections, but you proved me wrong. I'm glad they were appreciated. It gave me a chance to return the favour for the times you've helped me out. > I agree, as I said she just doesn't do anything for me. If she > increases your understanding, or if you believe that she does, good > for you! Right. As long as you don't go around designating her for hell anymore! > Good points. I have a question for you, which I have been thinking > about recently: Of the Noble Eightfold Path, is Right View "right > seeing" or is it something else? I tend to think that the Path falls into place if we are practicing correctly, but we can't practice the Path correctly by knowing what the factors are and aiming for them, if you know what I mean. In other words, I don't know! An embarassing confession, but I never think about the 8FP, though I have a rough idea what the factors are. The wholesome and unwholesome deeds seem easier to understand for me. And the Noble Truths more fruitful for reflection. So I guess I stop after Three! But I guess Right View wouldn't be seeing, because seeing is vipaka. The Path should surely have to do with the productive side of things. We don't do any fresh harm, or good, by seeing. It is a resultant. It is the mental action that follows where we get into trouble. So I would say Right View has to do with faith in and respect for the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha, and belief in the Noble Truths, and the view that there is indeed harm that ensues from unwholesome thoughts, speech and deeds, and good that comes from the wholesome. But not seeing. How can we see in a "right" way? It is a result of our kamma, technically speaking. Looking is another thing. After that moment of seeing consciousness, the looking begins. And that's where we get into trouble if we don't have wise attention. Taking the old clliche "you can look but you'd better not touch!" a step further. "You can look but you'd better not look with ayoniso manasikara!" Not that we want to go through life with our eyes on the ground. More middle way. Metta, Phil 39812 From: agriosinski Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 6:11am Subject: [dsg] Re: D.O. avija -> sankharas --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Agrios and Sarah, > I went through my file and cannot resist requoting a quote by Rob K who > wrote a long article on it before. It really refers to basics here in order > to have right understanding of D.O. We should not start the wrong way when > we begin to study it. Hi Nina and Sarah, I've done some reading and do have some general picture of whole process. > involved in this > description of conditions. The paticcasamupada is > simply a description of > changing processes. Thus it is not "we" who are having > ignorance, nor is it > "us" who is being reborn or dying. > The more we see how it works the clearer the knowledge > of anatta, not-self, becomes. right. > Secondly there is no beginning to it. It is a cycle. > However, at the > parinibbana of an arahant there are no more conditions > for it to continue. > All namas and rupas cease arising. > > Next, we must know what the Buddha meant by avijja, > ignorance. Visuddhimagga > XVII 43: " it (avijja) prevents knowing the meaning of > collection in the > aggregates(khandas), the meaning of actuating in the > bases(ayatanas)…..the > meaning of reality in the truths…Also it prevents > knowing the meaning of > dukkha described in the four ways as `oppression > etc'..Furthermore it is > ignorance because it conceals the physical bases and > objects of > eyeconsciousness etc and the dependent origination." > In brief we can say it is an ignorance of the true > nature of paramattha > dhammas and the intricate ways they condition each > other.> If I am interested in avija and what Buddha meant by it, I'd rather read Buddhas explanations and not this monstrous buddhist encyklopedias or commentaries. I have no interest in them other then historical. There is one text I've found thanks to Sarah, but have no idea where is it from: `...This too is said; `Not knowing, bhikkhus, in ignorance he forms formations of merit, forms formations of demerit, forms formations of the imperturbable. As soon, bhikkhus, as a bhikkhu's ignorance is abandoned and clear vision is arisen, bhikkhus, with the fading away of ignorance and the arising of clear vision he does not form even formations of merit.'(cf Sii 82)." can't figure out what cf Sii 82 is. Could someone help me here? I am mainly interested in the process of coming to be, in exact mechanism of avija -> sankharas formation as I read yours Nina and RobsM explanation of 3fold moha/avija and have no problem spotting it at all :) What interests me is how it triggers sankharas. whole lota of metta, Agrios 39813 From: Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 1:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] ‘Cetasikas' study corner 74- Volition/cetanaa (d) Hi, Sarah (and Nina, and all) - In a message dated 12/15/04 3:05:11 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@y... writes: > Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) > ========================================== > [Ch.4 Volition(cetanaa]contd] > ***** > As regards the manifestation of cetanÃ¥ which is directing, the > AtthasÃ¥linÃcompares cetanÃ¥ with the chief disciple who recites > his own lessons and makes the other pupils recite their lessons as > well, with the chief carpenter who does his own work and makes > the other carpenters do their work, or with the general who fights > himself and makes the other soldiers take part in the battle, > > “…for when he begins, the others follow his example. Even so, > when volition starts work on its object, it sets associated states to > do each its own.“ > > The cetanÃ¥ which accompanies vipÃ¥kacitta and kiriyacitta merely > coordinates the tasks of the other dhammas it accompanies, it > does not ‘will’ kusala or akusala and it does not motivate wholesome > or unwholesome deeds. > > ======================== Here is a question: When, in functional mindstates, the cetana does not "will" kusala or akusala consequences, is it still the case that it "wills" states that are neutral, i.e. the cetana is non-kammic but still can be deemed as a "willing"? I ask this, because I particularly have in mind the arahant, who, if I'm not mistaken, has only kiriyacitta for mindstates. Certainly, the Buddha, Sariputta, and other well known arahants engaged in conventional volition, which suggests to me that cetana did operate in them in more than a mere coordinating fashion. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39814 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 5:29pm Subject: Dhamma Thread (180) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 14 functions of citta or consciousness. They are 1. patisandhi kicca or linking function 2. bhavanga kicca or life continueing function 3. avajjaja kicca or adverting function 4. dasana kicca or seeing function 5. savana kicca or hearing function 6. ghayana kicca or smelling function 7. sayana kicca or tasting function 8. phusana kicca or touching function 9. sampaticchana kicca or receiving function 10.santirana kicca or investigating function 11.votthapana kicca or determining function 12.javana kicca or mental impulsing function 13.tadarammana kicca or retention function 14.cuti kicca or last-existing function or dying function The first 3 functions have been explained. 4th to 8th functions will depend on what object has arisen. If vanna or ruparammana or visual object, cakkhuvinnana citta arises and does the function of seeing. If sadda or sound or saddarammana or auditory object arises, sotavinnana citta arises and does hearing. If gandha or smell, ghanavinnana citta arises and does smelling. If rasa or taste, jivhavinnana citta arises and does tasting. If photthabba or touch, kayavinnana citta arises and does touching. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39815 From: ericlonline Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 6:24pm Subject: [dsg] Re: 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' Hey Howard, E> To try to describe nibbana in prose would be to say something > like...it is pure awareness without a subject or object. > > =================== H> But why say "awareness"? Awareness of what, if there is no object? I think that with regard to nibbana, to say anything is already to say too much. I sometimes want to say that nibbana is "that", or is "the real". But these don't really say anything, do they? Silence is best, I think. Silence is awareness without subject and object. I think awareness is important in that Nibbana may be unselfconscious but it is not 'unconscious'. Otherwise a hit on the head with a hammer would suffice. PEACE E 39816 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 6:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:kusala and akusala Dear friend James, I still did not answer your letter, but meanwhile I enjoyed reading your dialogues with Phil. Phil gave already many answers about seeing! Maybe I do not add much. op 13-12-2004 06:01 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@y...:> > Here is my last word to you on this subject: I don't think you > should be so afraid of "atta belief" entering your practice. Doing > that is like being afraid of your own shadow! As you move closer to > the light (nibbana), and the light is directly overhead, the shadow > will be gone. Until then, make peace with it. N: Yes, lobha is like a shadow following us everywhere. We should not be afraid of this shadow, but realize it, face it with understanding. Otherwise more and more is accumulated and that is dangerous. J: ps. I think you should listen more to Lodewijk than Kh. Sujin. N: Lodewijk had conceit on account of your remark! I shall consult him more often when you bring up a point. He said that it is very understandable that Kh. Sujin's words do not appeal to you, it is very personal. He mentioned that in the beginning, for many years, he had great difficulty in understanding Kh. Sujin's words. But he gradually discovers that what she says is the truth. He also thinks that for a Thai audience her words are less difficult to understand. Nina. 39817 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 6:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: latent tendencies. Hi Howard, op 14-12-2004 19:26 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: >> H: If one were to say that anusaya are deep-seated cetasikas that may >>> be strengthened and weakened, but otherwise tenaciously replicate >> themselves >>> from moment to moment, and that manifest as outflowings, that would be an >>> explanation that is sufficiently detailed and credible for me to "buy". > ------------------------------------- > Howard: > But if they are "underlying microbes that are with each citta arising > and falling away," then they do replicate themselves each moment, do they not? > (I don't mean *exact* replication.) > --------- N: I would like to be careful here, in the use of the word replication, because this whole process is much more complex. Many more factors than we would ever think are involved. I give an illustration. We read in the Maha-Sutasoma Jataka (no. 458), that Angulimala in a former life was King Brahmadatta. His cook could not obtain meat and therefore he served him part of a human body. The King had been a Yakka in a former birth and had accumulated liking for human flesh. He could not resist having humans killed to obtain human flesh. The flavour of human flesh was the object in particular that he could not resist. We see here that there are many factors involved. The object has to be the right object for desire, he had accumulated strong desire for it. But also feeling is accumulated. Feeling accompanying desire can be pleasant feeling or indifferent feeling. Feeling has many different intensities, it never is the same. Also sañña is involved: it remembers former pleasant experiences. Also ignorance, another latent tendency, plays its part. Ignorance of dhammas is deeply accumulated. If we do not realize that ignorance is also accumulated in kusala citta we cannot understand D.O. We learn about different types of citta and cetasikas, and cittas are classified in different ways. We learn about citta rooted in ignorance and attachment, and even if we take one type of citta that is classified as one of the eight cittas rooted in attachment, we should know that it never is the same. There are many different intensities and it likes different objects. We like all sense objects, but liking for specific objects can be strongly accumulated. Many conditions are operating when a dhamma arises. This will help us to see that conditioned dhammas cannot be permanent and that they are subject to change. This illustrates that the subject of latent tendencies is most intricate and when I study it more I realize how little I understand. We do not know exactly how it all works, but we know that we have latent tendencies, all of them. The akusala cittas that are condiotend by them may arise in a way that is unforeseeable, unexpectantly. Suddenly anger may appear and take one by surprise. In India we discussed this subject and I was thinking about the danger of latent tendencies that ever become more, life after life. Would this not be the condition for terrible clashes, outbursts of anger, violence, and so on in the present life? The answer was that it depends on many other conditions whether strong akusala has the opportunity to appear. But we never know what will happen in our life. Studying the Abhidhamma, I like to repeat, gives us a sense of urgency to develop understanding of what appears now, including akusala. Nina. 39818 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 6:51pm Subject: Re: Vis. studies. T.G. Hi TG, very good. I would like your input in our Vis studies. It is useful if you bring forward what you found hard to understand. Larry and I shall soon start with feeling khandha. Before that one section more about dying-consciousness and the cycle. Looking forward, Nina. op 15-12-2004 02:01 schreef TGrand458@a... op TGrand458@a...: > I've spent years studying the Abhidhamma and contrary to what some > people might think, I consider it beneficial. I've even read the > Visuddhimagga > cover to cover about 10 times...that's not too shabby. And it even has a > couple > of pages that instruct on how to practice as I recall. ;-) (Of course that > doesn't mean I understood a lick of it.) I primarily use Suttas as examples > because I consider them the "prime authority." 39819 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 6:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same', TG, Suan. Hi TG, op 14-12-2004 20:54 schreef TGrand458@a... op TGrand458@a...: > > Is there any realitivly "hard evidence" of this in the Suttas? N: No. In the Expositor it is explained that nibbana is arupa, thus, nama, but not nama which experiences. It is experienced, it bends citta and cetasika towards it (namati: to bend). In the same way, viññaana in this context has the meaning of to be known (like vineyya). We could ask Suan if he has time, to help us find the Co. passage. Nina. 39820 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 6:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Phra Dhammadharo, Phil Hello Phil, I like your letter with comments. I take up one point. op 13-12-2004 00:55 schreef plnao op plnao@j...: > I'm not sure if tiredness is a rupa or a nama - Htoo gave me some > interesting > comments but I'm afraid I can't remember them- but in any case my thinking > about > it is nama. N: I quite agree that we have to hear again, again, and again that our thinking we find so important is only nama. Tiredness: a situation, but there are nama and rupa. One reminder I heard:when you feel tired you have clinging to the idea of self. In India Kh. Sujin had bodily tiredness, but all the same she would not give in and kept on explaining Dhamma. Nina. 39821 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 8:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: D.O. avija -> sankharas Hi Agrios see my post to James, where I quote. When you get used to the terms they are not so monstruous as you think. op 15-12-2004 15:11 schreef agriosinski op agriosinski@y...: > If I am interested in avija and what Buddha meant by it, > I'd rather read Buddhas explanations and not this monstrous > buddhist encyklopedias or commentaries. > I have no interest in them other then historical. > > There is one text I've found thanks to Sarah, > but have no idea where is it from: > > `...This too is said; `Not knowing, bhikkhus, in ignorance he forms > formations of merit, forms formations of demerit, forms formations of > the > imperturbable. t what cf Sii 82 is. N: Kindred Sayings II, Kindred Sayings on Cause, 6, Tree Suttas, § 51. A: I am mainly interested in the process of coming to be, > in exact mechanism of avija -> sankharas formation as I read > yours Nina and RobsM explanation of 3fold moha/avija > and have no problem spotting it at all :) > What interests me is how it triggers sankharas. N:So long as there is ignorance one still commits kamma (here: sankhara or formations) that produces rebirth and results during life. Read Sarah's quote about the threefold sankhara. Also when performing kusala kamma ignorance is still a latent tendency so long as one is not an arahat. Sarah:, Dispeller: “Furthermore, his non-abandonment of that ignorance about the four truths in particular prevents him from recognising as suffering the suffering called the fruit of merit (S: i.e kusala vipaka) which is fraught with the many dangers beginning with birth, ageing, disease and death, and so he initiates the formation of merit classed as bodily, verbal and mental formation in order to attain that [very suffering], like one desiring celestial nymphs [who jumps over] a mountain cliff. “Also not seeing how that fruit of merit reckoned as pleasure eventually produces great distress owing to the suffering in change, and that it gives no satisfaction, he initiates the formation of merit of the kinds aforesaid which is the condition for that [suffering], like a moth falling into a lamp’s flame, and like one who wants the drop of honey licking the honey-smeared knife-edge. Also, not seeing the danger in the indulgence of sense-desire, etc and the results thereof, through [wrongly] perceiving pleasure and being overcome by defilements, he initiates the formation of demerit occurring in the three doors, like a child who plays with filth and like one who wants to die and eats poison. Also, not aware of the suffering in change [and suffering] in formations [present] in immaterial results, through the perversion (vipallasa) of [perceiving them as] eternal, etc, he initiates the formation of the imperturbable (S: profitable volitions of immaterial sphere (kusalaa cetanaa aruupaavacara])which is the mental formation, like one who has lost his way and takes the road to a goblin city.> ***** Sarah: So ignorance of dependent origination and of the inherent unsatisfactoriness of all formations, including wholesome or profitable volitions, even of arupa jhanas, propels the cycle continuously from moment to moment, life to life ‘like one who has lost his way and takes the road to a goblin city’. Nina. > 39822 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 8:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ŒCetasikas' study corner 74- Volition/cetanaa (d) Hi Howard, A good point. I have to think. op 15-12-2004 15:19 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > Here is a question: When, in functional mindstates, the cetana does > not "will" kusala or akusala consequences, is it still the case that it > "wills" > states that are neutral, i.e. the cetana is non-kammic but still can be deemed > as a "willing"? I ask this, because I particularly have in mind the arahant, > who, if I'm not mistaken, has only kiriyacitta for mindstates. Certainly, the > Buddha, Sariputta, and other well known arahants engaged in conventional > volition, which suggests to me that cetana did operate in them in more than a > mere > coordinating fashion. N: The arahat acts, speaks and thinks with kiriyacittas accompanied by sobhana, beautiful cetasikas. He extends metta to all, has compassion, etc. Also his cetana is kiriya, it cannot produce any result. The conditions are such. We can use the word volition, his volition is directed towards the sobhana, what is righteous and noble, but we should remember that this is inoperative, thus, not producing vipaka. Therefore it is not kusala kamma. When he has smiling-consciousness it is kiriyacitta without roots. (see Htoo's series and the discussion). Nina. 39823 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 8:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality/ Rob M Dear James, Thank you for your remarks. I have a feeling that there is a misunderstanding here that can easily cleared up. Such contoversies are usually unnecessary. The article says: Buddhaghosa , I do not see this, on the contrary. Take the Dispeller, of Delusion, the Co to the Abh Book of Analysis: <642. That is to say, knowledge is understanding. It (i.e. Understanding) makes known and plain the four truths with each meaning and each cause. But this ignorance when it arises does not allow that [understanding] to make that [Dhamma] known and plain; thus, because of it opposition to knowledge, it is unknowing. > It explains Ignorance. Any problem? A quote by Ken O; in the Visud, Chapter XX 96 - 103 He understand thus “there is no heap or store of unarisen mentality-materiality [existing] prior to it arising. When it arises, it does not come from any heap or store; and when it ceases, it does not go in any direction. After knowing the above knowledge, he sees arising of materiality with the arising of ignorance, with the arising of craving, with the arising of kamma, with the arising of the materiality aggregate (i.e. Nutriment). He sees the fall of the materiality in the sense of condition cessation with the cessation of ignorance, with the cessation of craving, with the cessation of kamma, with the cessation of the materiality aggregate (i.e. Nutriment). Likewise the same for the other three mentality aggregates, change the nutriment to contact for feelings, preception and formaton aggregates as for consciousness, change the nutriment to mentality-materiality. When he thus see rise and fall in the two ways, according to condition, according to instant, the several truths (i.e. 4NT), aspect of the dependent origination, methods and and characteristics become evident to him.> Any problem? Thus, I think that the writer of the article should give some examples of quotes. Nina. op 15-12-2004 13:42 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@y...: > My conclusion from this reading: those who strictly adhere to the > viewpoint of Buddhaghosa and his commentaries will emphasize the > danger in concepts themselves rather than the danger in the process > of conceptualization leading to the proliferation of > conceptualization. I believe that this difference in viewpoint is > revealed so strikingly in the debates we so often see in DSG. 39824 From: Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 4:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. studies. T.G. In a message dated 12/15/2004 11:03:48 AM Pacific Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: Hi TG, very good. I would like your input in our Vis studies. It is useful if you bring forward what you found hard to understand. Larry and I shall soon start with feeling khandha. Before that one section more about dying-consciousness and the cycle. Looking forward, Nina. Hi Nina Quick comment of the Visuddimagga. Of course a complete masterpiece. But what I find the most invaluable are the last six chapters that specify details of the Path processes. They correspond beautifully with Suttas and provide more clarity as to how they function. Bhikkhu Nanamoli is one of my favorite translators. TG 39825 From: Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 4:08pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same', TG, Suan. In a message dated 12/15/2004 11:04:48 AM Pacific Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: > Is there any realitivly "hard evidence" of this in the Suttas? N: No. In the Expositor it is explained that nibbana is arupa, thus, nama, but not nama which experiences. It is experienced, it bends citta and cetasika towards it (namati: to bend). In the same way, viññaana in this context has the meaning of to be known (like vineyya). We could ask Suan if he has time, to help us find the Co. passage. Nina. Hi Nina I have the Expositor, a page number would be great if anyone has it handy. I find the above description fascinating. A Nama that doesn't experience? I guess that's like a Rupa that doesn't have the Four Great Elements. ;-) TG 39826 From: Egbert Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 9:47pm Subject: Re: To all of Nina Hi Nina, Thank you for your kind comments. I have added some more ruminations below. Perhaps it is too scientific, but sense > > base does not arise in a vacuum, it also requires many other > > conditions for its arising. > N: Yes. Instead of nervous system I am more inclined to use the word rupas > arising because of their appropriate conditions. > > H: I agree with you if you mean that the ego Nina is not a substantial > > entity. ... the story of Nina the actor that negotiates through the > > conflicts. These thoughts are real, but they have no foundation. > > Nina, the thought, does not, and cannot, do anything. > N: Agreed, it is a story we think of, a whole. I would leave out the term > conflicts. In reality there are only changing nama elements and rupa > elements. > But, in practice it is hard to swallow. Bitter medicine! I have the Channovada Sutta (M144)on my mind lately. What is left for Channa, for whom all story telling has ended? A body racked with unpleasant feeling. With the ceasing of the mental effluents there remains this far-from-neutral sack of skin and bones. There is, happily for Channa, the assurance that by ending the life of the body, there will be the ending of all unpleasantness. It is bitter medicine indeed! Kind Regards Herman 39827 From: Tep Sastri Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 7:21pm Subject: A Hello from Member #480 Hi, every one - I became member # 480 a moment ago, when the newest message number shown was 39,820. That's mean it is impossible for me to catch with what happened since day 1 here. Perhaps a quick review of 50 - 100 messages back should be adequate. Any recommendation, please? Regards, Tep ======== 39828 From: Egbert Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 10:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same', TG, Suan. Hi TG and all, > > Is there any realitivly "hard evidence" of this in the Suttas? > N: No. In the Expositor it is explained that nibbana is arupa, thus, nama, > but not nama which experiences. It is experienced, it bends citta and > cetasika towards it (namati: to bend). In the same way, viññaana in this > context has the meaning of to be known (like vineyya). > We could ask Suan if he has time, to help us find the Co. passage. > Nina. > > > I have the Expositor, a page number would be great if anyone has it handy. I > find the above description fascinating. > > A Nama that doesn't experience? I guess that's like a Rupa that doesn't have > the Four Great Elements. ;-) > > TG > The Nibbana of the Nikayas is markedly different from the Nibbana of the commentators. This is what the PTS dictionary has to say: N. is the untranslatable expression of the Unspeakable, of that for which in the Buddha's own saying there is no word, which cannot be grasped in terms of reasoning and cool logic, the Nameless, Undefinable (cp. the simile of extinction of the flame which may be said to pass from a visible state into a state which cannot be defined. Thus the Saint (Arahant) passes into that same state, for which there is "no measure" (i. e. no dimension): "atthangatassa na pamanam atthi . . . yena nan vajju: tan tassa n' atthi" Sn 1076. The simile in v. 1074: "acci yatha vata--vegena khitto atthan paleti, na upeti sankhan: evan muni namakaya vimutto atthan paleti, na upeti sankhan"). Yet, it is a reality, and its characteristic features may be described, may be grasped in terms of earthly language, in terms of space (as this is the only means at our disposal to describe abstract notions of time and mentality); e. g. accutan thanan, paran, amatan padan, amata (& nibbana--) dhatu. -- It is the speculative, scholastic view and the dogmatising trend of later times, beginning with the Abhidhamma period, which has more and more developed the simple, spontaneous idea into an exaggerated form either to the positive (i. e. seeing in N. a definite state or sphere of existence) or the negative side (i. e. seeing in it a condition of utter annihilation). Yet its sentimental value to the (exuberant optimism of the) early Buddhists (Rh. Davids, Early Buddhism, p. 73) is one of peace and rest, perfect passionlessness, and thus supreme happiness. Kind Regards Herman 39829 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 10:09pm Subject: Re: A Hello from Member #480 Dear Tep, You are warmly welcome. I would like to recommend to read useful messages and give your comments on them here. Yours, Htoo ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > Hi, every one - > > I became member # 480 a moment ago, when the newest message > number shown was 39,820. That's mean it is impossible for me to catch > with what happened since day 1 here. Perhaps a quick review of 50 - > 100 messages back should be adequate. > > Any recommendation, please? > > > Regards, > > > Tep > > ======== 39830 From: buddhatrue Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 10:11pm Subject: Re:kusala and akusala Friend Nina, Nina: I still did not answer your letter, but meanwhile I enjoyed reading your dialogues with Phil. Phil gave already many answers about seeing! Maybe I do not add much. James: I think that you did give me one post about this letter, which I read but I didn't respond because I didn't have much to say in response. Nowadays, since this list is so busy, I use my intuition to decide when to read the posts and when to respond. Sometimes I hit the nail on the head and sometimes I miss (especially since I have to correspond somewhat in secret due to the influence of my close friends…no one likes to give up attention! ;-). Phil has had a lot to say about seeing, and you, and Sarah, and Howard, and many others…and I still ask myself, "What in the heck are all of these people talking about? What does this have to do with the Noble Eightfold Path?" You see, I try to always bring things back to the Eightfold Path; otherwise it is just more mental proliferation…more nonsense. I guess I am very strict in this regard but I don't like to waste any time. Nina: Yes, lobha is like a shadow following us everywhere. We should not be afraid of this shadow, but realize it, face it with understanding. Otherwise more and more is accumulated and that is dangerous. James: I wasn't talking about lobha, I was talking about atta belief (forgive me but I don't know the Pali for that). This is funny because I did a Google search to find out what "lobha" means and the third entry, traditionally listed by the most significant entry in regards to usage and applicability (in Internet terms) is an article by Kh. Sujin!: http://www.dhammastudy.com/words7.html What does this mean? I've been caught in a Kh. Sujin trap!! Hehehe… Nina: Lodewijk had conceit on account of your remark! James: Hehehe…and I bet he was the one to tell you that wasn't he? Good for him! I also avoid praise; praise is Mara in disguise. Nina: I shall consult him more often when you bring up a point. He said that it is very understandable that Kh. Sujin's words do not appeal to you, it is very personal. James: Glad to know that someone is on my side! ;-)) Nina: He mentioned that in the beginning, for many years, he had great difficulty in understanding Kh. Sujin's words. But he gradually discovers that what she says is the truth. James: Yeah, maybe. Or maybe he just got tired of fighting with you about it! ;-)) Nina: He also thinks that for a Thai audience her words are less difficult to understand. James: Yes, this could be true as well as being an easy out. Let's just say that I don't understand her as much because I am not Thai. Metta, James 39831 From: Egbert Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 10:14pm Subject: Re: 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same', TG, Suan. Hi TG and all, While on the topic of PTS and Nibbana: "Nibbana is purely and solely an ethical state, to be reached in this birth by ethical practices, contemplation and insight. It is therefore not transcendental. The first and most important way to reach N. is by means of the eightfold Path, and all expressions which deal with the realisation of emancipation from lust, hatred and illusion apply to practical habits and not to speculative thought. N. is realised in one's heart; to measure it with a speculative measure is to apply a wrong standard." Kind Regards Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Egbert" wrote: > > A Nama that doesn't experience? I guess that's like a Rupa that > doesn't have > > the Four Great Elements. ;-) > > > > TG > > 39832 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 10:21pm Subject: Welcome to Pubbarama and Tep! (wasRe: A Hello from Member #480) Hello Alan (pubbarama) and Tep (buddhistmeditator), Welcome! Nice to see you both here. I know you will both bring with you a keen enthusiasm, knowledge of Dhamma and an enjoyment of stimulating discussion. :-) If you go to the Files section via the link below, and then select Useful Posts (fourth topic from the top) you will find a linked alphabetic index of subjects and some hyperlinked posts (selected for relevance by the Moderators, Jon and Sarah). You can spend many happy hours wandering around in there, and anything you are unsure of or disagree with can be re-discussed anytime on dsg. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/ metta and peace, Christine (cooran) ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 39833 From: Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 5:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same', TG, Suan. In a message dated 12/15/2004 2:03:43 PM Pacific Standard Time, hhofman@t... writes: It is the speculative, scholastic view and the dogmatising trend of later times, beginning with the Abhidhamma period, which has more and more developed the simple, spontaneous idea into an exaggerated form either to the positive (i. e. seeing in N. a definite state or sphere of existence) or the negative side (i. e. seeing in it a condition of utter annihilation). Yet its sentimental value to the (exuberant optimism of the) early Buddhists (Rh. Davids, Early Buddhism, p. 73) is one of peace and rest, perfect passionlessness, and thus supreme happiness. Kind Regards Herman Hi Herman (good comments!) Re: annihilation: the way I see it, for something to be annihilated it would have to be a "something unto itself" for it to be a "thing to be annihilated." If conditions are ever changing phenomena, dependently structured by things that are also not "things unto themselves," what's to be annihilated? Its only our self-view that thinks there is something to be annihilated. If self-view is overcome, there's no basis for the annihilation-view to arise. The "annihilation rap" only comes from those who are saddled with self-view. The Buddha in essence says that the 5 aggregates are a system that generate more suffering than they're worth. If there's no-self to the 5 aggregates, they are just a "suffering machine." So if the experiences of the 5 aggregates come to an end...all that has happened is an unnecessary "suffering machine" has come to an end. And that's a good thing. Any "search" for some type of experience within Nibbana or Parinibbana is just that good o'l rascal self-view trying to find a way to keep the "system" afloat. And it does try so hard. TG 39834 From: buddhatrue Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 10:43pm Subject: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Friend Phil, Phil: Well, James, I must admit I was afraid you'd get snorky in response to those corrections, but you proved me wrong. I'm glad they were appreciated. It gave me a chance to return the favour for the times you've helped me out. James: Hehehe…actually my responses were very snorky...as usual ;- ). But I guess I was too subtle for you. If Joyce was here, her and I could really exchange some barbs of words! ;-)) (But that wouldn't be too pretty. ;-). Phil: Right. As long as you don't go around designating her for hell anymore! James: LOL! Well, I meant what I said. The teaching of the dhamma is a very, very, very serious matter because the kamma consequences are so significant and grave. This is an important issue (and I realize that even though my joking may seem otherwise). Will Kh. Sujin go to hell for what she is teaching? I'm not sure; but if she does, she can join Buddhaghosa there! ;-)) (just kidding). Phil: An embarassing confession, but I never think about the 8FP, though I have a rough idea what the factors are. James: I really respect you for admitting this, but what are you going to do about it? Are you going to continue to defend Kh. Sujin, a woman you have never met, possibly in order to win the approval of the majority of the members of this list, or are you going to focus on what the Buddha taught? The Noble Eightfold Path is everything! (and I agree with Bhante Vimalaramsi when he suggests that abbreviating the Noble Eightfold Path into "8FP" or any other such derivative is disrespectful of the Buddha's teaching). Phil: How can we see in a "right" way? It is a result of our kamma, technically speaking. James: What we see is a result of our kamma and also not, it is a mixture, but what we "see" from the inside, from our mental processing, is the important area. As you have concluded, and as I have also concluded, "Right View" is not necessarily `right seeing', so why get all excited about it? Metta, James 39835 From: buddhatrue Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 10:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality/ Rob M Friend Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: Thus, I think that the writer of the article should give some examples of > quotes. > Nina. The writer of this book gave many quotes and analysis but I did not include them in my short summary. The writer, Bhikkhu Nanananda, writes in the preface to this book, "On the other, it might engender an unreasonable distrust leading to a sweeping condemnation of the commentaries as a whole. This work has failed in its purpose if its critical scrutiny of the occasional shortcomings in the commentarial literature makes anyone forget his indebtedness to the commentaries for his knowledge of the Dhamma." You see, the author has no axe to grind when it comes to Buddhaghosa, and that is very commendable, but I do have an axe to grind! Why? I don't want to explain now because I have on numerous occassions in the past. In this context, let's just say that I don't have to answer to anyone; I am a free agent. I can say what I want to say about Buddhaghosa (unless I am unfairly moderated) and I like it that way! Anyway, I shouldn't debate with you from the author's perspective because I am not the author. Realize that everything I write is from my perspective and it will be biased as a result. Metta, James 39836 From: Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 0:03am Subject: Vism.XIV,124 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 124. And after death there is rebirth-linking again; and after rebirth-linking, life-continuum. Thus the conscious continuity of beings who hasten through the kinds of becoming, destiny, station [of consciousness], and abode [of beings] occurs without break. But when a man attains Arahantship here, it ceases with the cessation of his death consciousness. This is the section of the detailed explanation dealing with the consciousness aggregate. 39837 From: gazita2002 Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 0:55am Subject: good health. Hello dhamma friends, Currently spending most of my time recuperating, so I was intrigued when I read about 'proficiency - paagunnataa' in CMA p87. Proficiency-paagunnataa is one of the 19 sobhana cetasikas that arises with every kusala citta. It states "the 2fold proficiency has the characteristic of healthiness of mental body [cetasikas] and citta, respectively. Its function is to crush unhealthiness of cetasikas and citta. It is manifested as absence of disability. Its proximate cause is the cetasikas and citta. It should be regarded as opposed to lack of faith etc. which cause unhealthiness of the cetasikas and citta." Thinking about this, I decided that good health is probably only a momentary occurrence, when kusala citta arises along with these 19 wholesome cetasikas, [including other wholesome cetasikas that aren't amongst these universals.] If this is the case, then the opposite must be: akusala is bad health. From Nina who was explaining to Mike:....with the arising of each akusala citta the underlying sickness [latent tendencies] gets worse. But on the other hand, by wisdom they can also wear out....... When the sense of urgency arises, I wonder if its kusala or if its aversion to the idea of continuing endlessly in Samsara, but of course only the development of right understanding of the presently arising dhammas will ever really know. 'I' can't, there is no 'I' Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita 39838 From: plnao Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 1:23am Subject: Re: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi James James: Hehehe.actually my responses were very snorky...as usual ;- ). But I guess I was too subtle for you. Phil: hehe back. I knew you were and even wrote "Is this gentle James setting a trap for me?" but then erased it. But I knew your seemingly innocuous question was a trap. Still, you took my corrections without getting defensive, and that was appreciated. I thought afterwards that assuming that people will behave a certain way is an example of wrong view. People are inconstant. Of course, there are accumulations that lead to character. I'm sure we haven't had our last mutual-snork fest! But I imagine they will become rarer and rarer. Phil: Right. As long as you don't go around designating her for hell anymore! James: LOL! Well, I meant what I said. Phil: But then the next day you took it back and if I'm not mistaken admitted that you had mistook her teaching. I know our understanding changes day by day. That's to be expected. But if you are going to bounce back and forth on sending K Sujin to hell I think you yourself should be aware of the possible consequences. Maybe you will get a bunk bed under Buddhaghosa! I wonder if he snores? James: The teaching of the dhamma is a very, very, very serious matter because the kamma consequences are so significant and grave. This is an important issue (and I realize that even though my joking may seem otherwise). Will Kh. Sujin go to hell for what she is teaching? I'm not sure; but if she does, she can join Buddhaghosa there! ;-)) (just kidding). Phil: Yes, the teaching of Dhamma is very serious, you're right. I can see that. That's why I get so saddened by the kind of Dhamma I see in Japan. The variations within Theravada are so subtle compared to the big leap in wrong view we see elsewhere that I really wonder why people get upset about them. We are all keen on the Pali canon. I'm sure you have discussed Dhamma with people who think that quoting the Buddha is intellectual wankery. That's the kind of wrong view you should go after, in my opinion. Phil: An embarassing confession, but I never think about the 8FP, though I have a rough idea what the factors are. James: I really respect you for admitting this, but what are you going to do about it? Phil: Nothing, for now. As I said, I reflect on the Noble Truths every morning. Trying to understand suffering, and understanding the origination of suffering, is enough for me now. I believe the path factors will fall into place. What good does it do to understand what Right Speech is if you are incapable of applying it because of conditions? You wrote a very convincing series on the Eightfold Path for teens, including right speech, but I'm sure you yourself would be the first to admit that you don't follow it. You spoke of the conditions that were set by your father's influence. (You posted that e-mail message from him.) Knowing the definitions of the path factors doesn't have all that much to do with giving rise to them, in my opinion. When I first came across Dhamma, I spent so much time trying to figure out what Right Mindfulness is, and why some translations said Right Intention and others said Right Thinking. And that sort of thing. I don't think about that anymore. When the time comes for me to think about it, I will know. For know, The Noble Truths are enough. James::Are you going to continue to defend Kh. Sujin, a woman you have never met, possibly in order to win the approval of the majority of the members of this list, Phil: Oh yes! Sweet sweet approval. Or as Homer Simpson would say "MMM Approval!" Seriously, Nina's books have had a revolutionary impact on my life. Well, Abhidhamma has. Nina wouldn't have written those books without K Sujin, so yes, if I see her dissed in an unthoughtful way I will leap in to her rescue, cape aflow! James: or are you going to focus on what the Buddha taught? Phil: Well, I am a Triple Basket man myself, so I believe Abhidhamma is Very Good Dhamma. You don't, and that's fine. Abhidhamma is not for everyone. James: The Noble Eightfold Path is everything! (and I agree with Bhante Vimalaramsi when he suggests that abbreviating the Noble Eightfold Path into "8FP" or any other such derivative is disrespectful of the Buddha's teaching). Phil: As I said above, understanding the Fst and Snd NTs should come first! I disagree about forms of language. It is the citta that is important. You don't know my citta when I write 8FP and I don't know yours when you write Eightfold Noble Path Phil: How can we see in a "right" way? It is a result of our kamma, technically speaking. James: What we see is a result of our kamma and also not, it is a mixture, Phil: Technically speaking, no. It is vipaka. But as I laid out in the previous posts there is already so much proliferation going on through kusala and akusala cittas by the time we *think* "I see a woman" that it would seem like a mixture. James: but what we "see" from the inside, from our mental processing, is the important area. Phil: Stress on the quotation marks. We don't see it, we think it. Seeing is vipaka. Nina stresses again and again how important it is to know the jati of a citta. (ie whether it is vipaka or kamma) James: As you have concluded, and as I have also concluded, "Right View" is not necessarily `right seeing', so why get all excited about it? Phil: You're the one who gets excited about it James! You are ready to send people to hell over it! I just find it to be a very helpful teaching that helps me to understand the processes that lead to proliferation, that help me to understand anatta a little bit better. Untrained, run of the mill people (as the Buddha calls them) think that they control seeing. We know better. K Sujin's teaching helps us there. (Or doesn't, depending on one's accumulations.) I enjoy these slightly sarcastic but also affectionate exchanges with you, James. You are a good Dhamma friend, even when you irritate me! That's what friends are for - sometimes! Metta, Phil 39839 From: Ken O Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 2:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' And absabhava = pannatti ? Hi Joop A very good question :) My own opinion, twofold a. because each aggregates has their own unique characteristics for eg feeling is the flavour of an object b. because each aggregates is real as compare to concepts as concepts do not have characteritics of their own, concepts changed with individual but aggregates are the same regardless what planes or what individual that experiences them Ken O 39840 From: AlanLam Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 2:03am Subject: Re: The jhaanas and the Lay Disciples --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Dear Alan, > > I'm not sure I'll be able to do justice to your comments, but let's see. I > assure you that my `command' of any of the texts is very limited indeed! ... > Please keep discussing all these terms. It's very interesting and I can > learn from it. As I say, sometimes I'm slow to respond, so don't be > deterred. > > Metta, > > Sarah > p.s So you live in Bkk and know one of K.Sujin's nephews or nieces?? I > knew all her nieces and nephews when they were young and used to visit the > house where she lived with her father, as I used to stay there when I > visited Bkk. Have you ever visited the Foundation? A couple of our members > here like Sukin and Betty go regularly to the Saturday afternoon English > discussions. Recommended! You may also like to listen to the audio tapes > we've edited and uploaded. Many of these points are raised on them (Patna > Board Room and Lumbini discussions from memory). > http://www.dhammastudygroup.org/ > ============================================== Dear Sarah, Thank you for the kind respond. It is better late then never. I am happy with your respond, as I have no knowledge of Pali language at all. I am just a pure cultivator. I spoke from just my Vipassana experience only. And, yes, I hope some others could enlighten us further on this topic. On Khun Sujin, my friend being the nephew, from the 1st mother who has passed away. He is the oldest among the children. I heard they have made an arrangement to meet for New year Dinner gathering. I used to hear from him about his Aunt's Dharma activites and another E-Sangha member that visit the centre once or twice a year to discuss dharma activities. But no, I did not and have not visit to the centre as yet. I do presumed I will do so most probably after this year then. With warm regards and Metta. 39841 From: AlanLam Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 2:13am Subject: Welcome to Pubbarama and Tep! (wasRe: A Hello from Member #480) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > > Hello Alan (pubbarama) and Tep (buddhistmeditator), > > Welcome! Nice to see you both here. I know you will both bring > with you a keen enthusiasm, knowledge of Dhamma and an enjoyment of > stimulating discussion. :-) ... > metta and peace, > Christine (cooran) Hi Cooran, Here we meet again. Thanks for the kind gesture. I have just mentioned to Sarah that you do visit to Khun Sujin's place for Dharma discussion etc. Best regards with Metta too. > ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 39842 From: buddhatrue Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 8:28pm Subject: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Friend Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "plnao" wrote: > > Hi James > > James: Hehehe.actually my responses were very snorky...as usual ;- > ). But I guess I was too subtle for you. > > Phil: hehe back. I knew you were and even wrote "Is this gentle James > setting a trap for me?" but then erased it. But I knew your > seemingly innocuous question was a trap. > > Still, you took my corrections without getting defensive, and that > was appreciated. > I thought afterwards that assuming that people will behave a certain way > is an example of wrong view. People are inconstant. Of course, there are > accumulations that lead to character. > I'm sure we haven't had our last mutual-snork fest! But I imagine they > will become rarer and rarer. > > Phil: Right. As long as you don't go around designating her for hell > anymore! > > James: LOL! Well, I meant what I said. > > Phil: But then the next day you took it back and if I'm not mistaken > admitted that you had mistook her teaching. I know our understanding > changes day by day. That's to be expected. But if you are going to bounce > back and forth on sending K Sujin to hell I think you yourself should be > aware > of the possible consequences. Maybe you will get a bunk bed under > Buddhaghosa! I wonder if he snores? I wrote to you before that it exhausts me to have to defend positions I didn't make, but I guess I will do it again. In my first post on this subject I questioned, get that QUESTIONED (as in not sure), if Kh. Sujin was teaching something dangerous to the dhamma. Nina replied with a post that explained what Kh. Sujin was teaching, how it didn't correspond to the concerns I put forth, and I was satisfied with Nina's answers. I concluded that even though I may not agree with some of what Kh. Sujin teaches or it may not impress me terribly, it still isn't dangerous to the dhamma. At no time did I `designate' Kh. Sujin for hell! LOL! I wrote that rebirth in hell is a possibility for teaching something dangerous to the dhamma, like one who splits the sangha, and I simply mentioned that. So, again, I meant what I wrote the first time, and the second time, and the third time…I have not been switching positions. The problem is, and I don't mean this in a rude way, you are not paying careful attention to the subtle meanings of my posts. The rest of your post somewhat revolves around this issue, and I have to get ready for work, so I will stop there. I also enjoy these exchanges with you because you aren't afraid to show your human side and I believe you have a kind heart. Metta, James 39843 From: jwromeijn Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 9:41pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Letter to B.Bodhi-'The Jhânas and the Lay Disciple ..' --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "AlanLam" wrote: ... Hallo Alan, Thanks for your message. Sarah has given a reaction from her big Theravada-knowledge. I will give a more personal one. I think we should practice all the aspects of the Noble Eightfold Path, thus concentration/absorption and mindfulness/insight. The ideal exact mix doesn't exist: depend on the personality of the individual and the cultural context. And to much experimenting (special without a teacher) and spiritual shopping is not good. There are many school in (Theravada-based) meditation, and many claim that their system is the best, bringest us the most far in the path to enlightenment. For this reasons and the fact I have found good vipassana teachers (insight-meditation, Mahasi-style) and don't know (Theravada-based) teachers that can guide me in jhanic meditation, I'm doing now vipassana ombined with metta-meditation. That vipassana is only for beginners: that's only an opinion, doesn't bother me, I will experience in some years. But there is more in your message about what I have another opinion: I don't want to be any more result-oriented in my professional careeer and I don't want to be result-oriented in my spiritual life. That the meditation of Ven. MahaMoghallana can give me the best magical powers of all Arhats: I'm not interested in getting magical powers at all ! That easy because I don't believe such powers exist. You state: "Without jhana state what one contemplates is just mundane or relative truth only. Whereas when one reaches the jhana stage …, when contemplating the dharma factors, one contemplating the supra- mundane or ultimate truth." Well, I don't know that so sure. I know the "two truth theory": conceptual truth versus absolute truth but that not the same as mundane versus supra-mundane, talking about supra-mundane is transcendentalism and (for me) the Buddha was a realist, not a transcendentalist. The second part of your message was in itself clear, but I don't understand the relation of it with the first part, and with my question. Maybe you can explain that a little. Metta Joop 39844 From: jwromeijn Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 9:43pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Letter to B.Bodhi-'The Jhânas and the Lay Disciple ..' --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Dear Joop, ... Dear Sarah Thanks for your kind letter to me. I will react on two topics: 1 Is sabhava, translated as self-nature, not a form of atta-belief ? That was my question, based on the wellknown article of Karunadasa. I have already reacted on the answer a year ago of Nina, because Christine and Ken told me this discussion has alreay been in the dsg. In this place I say: when Nina is right and sabhava means 'characteristics' than I have no problem, I even think it can than even better be translated with 'properties' of dhammas in the same way that in physics particles like an electron have properties. But like the Mahayana-term 'Buddha-Nature' also the term 'self- nature' mades me suspicous: that the very strong and many time unconscious working atta-belief in the dominant Hindu culture of India has been working, and even has influenced commentators. (I don't have his books with me now but I think Kalupahana has influenced me in this topic). 2 What is an orthodox Theravadan view? You are really to humble talking about your limited understanding. - Perhaps it's not nice of nice but exact talking about limited understanding of a 'normal' human being belongs to orthodoxy. To me that term means that there is a big body of knowledge existing outside individual human beings to which I (not enlightened) can only partly get access. - A body of knowledge in the second place that can no more get changed, not under the influence of new empirical facts and not under the infuence of deeper insight; in one of my first messages I said I need a new citta (the 90/122 to to say), a 'social citta', with the content "being aware of and feeling connected with another sentient being, especially with another human being". I got the impression that proposing a new citta, or proposing a change in the system of the 28 (?) rupa's is not possible. - In the third place is, in general terms, an orthodox view a 'greedy view': difficult to be a partly Theravadin and combine that with ideas of Mahayana, natural science and agnosticism. Of course it is possible in this DSG, you have assured me but still it is difficult with so much orthodoxy in the dsg that I think many times: I don't belong in this Forum. - In the fourth place the discussions don't have enough a 'historical dimension', perhaps that is something beling to the Indian culture. It is nearly denied that there is any difference between the Teachings of the Buddha and the Abhidhamma, that there is any difference between the Tipitaka and the commentaries. And when it is not denied it is found found important that and why such differences existed. To me there is an analogy between historical processes and individual processes so it's not just an intellectual but also a spiritual need to know the history of ideas. That's enough for this moment, I think. In another post, to Alan, I have said some things about insight meditation. Metta Joop 39845 From: plnao Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 10:18pm Subject: Re: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi James James : I wrote to you before that it exhausts me to have to defend positions I didn't make, but I guess I will do it again. (snip) At no time did I `designate' Kh. Sujin for hell! LOL! Phil: Ok James, you're right. I read too much into that statement. Sorry about that. I know you care about people, and Dhamma, that's why you wrote that - just like the time you asked Jon if he was sure he wasn't in the service of Mara! (I'm afraid I've never been able to see him quite the same way since....) And it's true that I often read people's posts in a very subjective way, assigning meaning to them based on my expectations/needs. Of course, I do that with Dhamma as well. All beginners do. That's the danger of studying the Suttanta without feedback from good Dhamma friends. That's another topic. Metta, Phil 39846 From: Bhikkhu Samahita Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 9:24pm Subject: Life inside a Bottle ... !!! Friends: The Way to Escape: Life is like being caught up inside an empty bottle... Even buzzing much around like a housefly one gets actually nowhere & quite often ends up stone dead, lying heaped up among other corpses on the bottom... The only Way out is Upwards, towards the Light and through the always apparent yet as if hidden hole & out into the open & free space !!! 'Inside the Bottle' signifies the repeated round of rebirth & death, again & again in this Samsara - 'Buzzing Around' signifies the useless & futile urge craving, & monotonic restless stress of life itself! 'Upwards' signifies progress along increased morality, absorbed concentration & insight of understanding! 'The Light' signifies the Buddha-Dhamma to follow & utilize like a guiding lighthouse & torch in the dark... 'The Hole' signifies the Noble 8-fold Way to initiate, develop, expand, refine, purify, complete & perfect! 'Open & Free Space' signifies the Deathless Nibbana; silent & still, safe & same, even & eternal Peace & Bliss !!! Come Along, friends! I'll show it to you! Directly !!! Friendship is the Greatest ! Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. 39847 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 11:18pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 75- Volition/cetanaa (e) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.4 Volition(cetanaa]contd] ***** Cetanå which accompanies kusala citta or akusala citta has a double task, it is ‘exceedingly energetic’. Apart from coordinating the other dhammas, it ‘wills’ kusala or akusala and when it has the intensity to motivate a deed through body, speech or mind, it is capable of producing the result of that deed later on. When we speak about kusala kamma or akusala kamma we usually think of courses of action (kamma pathas) which can be performed through body, speech or mind. However, we should remember that when we perform wholesome or unwholesome deeds it is actually the wholesome or unwholesome volition or intention which motivates the deed and this is the activity of kamma which is accumulated and can produce its appropriate result later on. Thus, akusala kamma and kusala kamma are actually akusala cetanå and kusala cetanå. ***** [Ch.4 Volition(cetanaa) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 39848 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Dec 15, 2004 11:34pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A Hello from Member #480 Hi Tep, I remember you and was sorry when you left us. I'm glad to see you back! As I recall, you're Thai American and live in Texas? I also remember you're well-read and have studied the teachings for a long time. I'll look forward to your contributions again. I see you know Chris and others already too. --- Tep Sastri wrote: > I became member # 480 a moment ago, when the newest message > number shown was 39,820. That's mean it is impossible for me to catch > with what happened since day 1 here. Perhaps a quick review of 50 - > 100 messages back should be adequate. > > Any recommendation, please? ... Yes, we've all been busy here in your absence;-). Lots of new faces for you to get to know. I suggest you (and any other new members) just start your own threads and then pick up others slowly according to your interests. If you wish to ever read through parts of the archives like a novel, the best way to do this is at the back up site: http://www.dhammastudygroup.org/ Here, you can scroll through easily (off-line if you download) without any ads. In case you are confused at all, there are two on-going texts (in addition to Htoo's series): 1) Visuddhimagga, ch XiV posted by Larry in installments with Nina's summary from the Tika (commentary). They're always delighted if anyone joins in with queeries, comments or even disagreements! 2) 'Cetasikas' by Nina which I'm posting in short installments. At the moment we're working through the Universal Cetasikas - phassa, vedana, sanna and now cetana. I'm always glad when friends chip in here in any shape or form too. Let us know if you have any other qus or comments. Metta, Sarah ========= 39849 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 0:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' Dear Nina, Christine & All, --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Sarah, > I remember. Suan wrote about nibbaana and viññaa.na. Here, viññaa.na > means: > what can be known. Thus, in this context it is not consciousness. > Nibbana > can be known by the lokuttara citta which experiences it. .... Thanks for the prompt on Suan's messages. Here are some which friends may like to check (mostly Suan's but one of mine too)which discuss the lines I referred to: vi~n~naa.na /nibbana http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/16857 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/16916 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/16922 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/16945 This post of yours (Nina's) also includes the Atth detail and reference on Nibbana as nama: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/25554 Metta, Sarah ======= > sarahprocterabbott@y...: > > > there are just two lines in the Tipitaka > > which particularly have been used (some might say abused!) for much of > the > > Mahayana edifice and these kinds of ideas. One of these is the line > about > > luminous mind (AN1:10)just referred to in my letter to BB (see > 'luminous' > > in UP for more) and the other is the line where vinnana refers to > nibbana > > (and not consciousness) which was discussed in detail before. (I've > just > > forgotten the sutta, MN49, I think). 39850 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 0:54am Subject: note from an old friend - Gayan! Dear Nina, Sir Mike (!), RobK and old DSGers, Gayan sent me this note about the audio recording from India which I said I'd like to share with you: G:>Downloading everything available in http://www.dhammastudygroup.org , not even missing a single megabyte :) Probably you have been hearing some disturbing news from Sri Lanka.. Monks protesting..Bombs...deaths etc very un-buddhist but still buddhist when we take into account what buddha was warning about time and again. Wish you happy holidays! Metta, Gayan. .... --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > P.s. Gabi will join the next India trip! .... S:Very good news! I hope other DSG friends will consider it too. When I got back, my doctor said I should avoid all such trips in future because of my 'acute allergic reactions', but I said I'd already promised a friend (you!), I'd be joining the next one;-). As you said, K.Sujin is a good model when it comes to not dwelling on one's tiredness/sickness etc. I didn't tell you, but when I went to pick her up after breakfast in Sikkhim, she mentioned she'd been waiting for me to arrange the discussion for quite some time, even though she was quite sick then. One could see that the Dhamma was the best medicine (even if it's bitter for us at times!). In Varanasi she said she'd been waiting for us too;-. Good to hear of Lodewijk's improved health and interest to join again. Metta, Sarah ======== 39851 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 1:16am Subject: Re: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi Herman, --- Egbert wrote: > Just by way of complement/contrast, modern science holds that > hearing is the "first" sense, in that it is the first to develop in > the womb, and the last to disappear in the final stages of death. > (Rites for the dying all around the world acknowledge this fact) .... S: I'm not sure there is necessarily any conflict here.... .... > > It is also considered the most immediate sense, in that there is no > escaping sound. The eyes may be closed so that unwanted sights can > be excluded, but no matter how one averts the head, sound is there. .... S: I hear you, Herman. We can only say 'sound is there' when it is heard. Of course, this seems to be all the time, but it isn't. Sense and mind door processes follow each other so rapidly and whilst it seems there is seeing, hearing and thinking at the same time, we know this isn't true. The texts suggest that visible objects are the most commonly experienced, followed by sounds and this is how it would seem to me. Which sense are we most attached to or proliferate most about? I'm sure there are individual differences here. Obviously, as a musician, you're very keenly alert to sounds. We had a discussion (in Jetavana) about which realities people have most difficulty in comprehending and several mentioned visible object for the reasons we've been discussing, but Jon and I answered differently. Different accumulations, that's all. I had kept one of your old posts in which you brought up a very good point about flashes of light and squinting (I forget the details now as I no longer had it). I think it related to some discussions we had in India and subsequently on list with Howard about different moments of seeing visible object and experiencing with unpleasant feeling through the body-sense (which can be in the eye too). I don't know how long you've been following the discussions, but I can try to find the posts on this that we wrote if you like. I know you don't like to be welcomed back, Herman, so I'll just say it's been noted;-). Metta, Sarah ====== 39852 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 1:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality/ Rob M Dear friend James, I understand what you mean. Let us not debate now. Nina. op 15-12-2004 23:58 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@y...: > You see, the author has no axe to grind when it comes to > Buddhaghosa, and that is very commendable, but I do have an axe to > grind! Why? I don't want to explain now because I have on numerous > occassions in the past. 39853 From: agriosinski Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 6:14am Subject: Re: D.O. avija -> sankharas Hi Nina and All, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: [...] > > There is one text I've found thanks to Sarah, > > but have no idea where is it from: > > > > `...This too is said; `Not knowing, bhikkhus, in ignorance he forms > > formations of merit, forms formations of demerit, forms formations of > > the > > imperturbable. t what cf Sii 82 is. > > N: Kindred Sayings II, Kindred Sayings on Cause, 6, Tree Suttas, § 51. > > still can't find it. can't even find Samyutta Nikaya on Cause. is it available somewhere on the net? lost, Agrios :) 39854 From: Tep Sastri Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 7:23am Subject: Re: A Hello from Member #480 Hi Sarah, Christine, and Htoo - I am amazed by Sarah's excellent memory. Well, that is definitely an advantage for me; I do not have to re-introduce myself. Thank you all for the warm welcome and the useful tips you gave for this new-again member to get ready here-- an unusual Forum where the information flow is quite rapid. I have noticed the change in Christine's last name. Congratulations! Best wishes to everybody, Tep ========== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Tep, > > I remember you and was sorry when you left us. I'm glad to see you back! > As I recall, you're Thai American and live in Texas? I also remember > you're well-read and have studied the teachings for a long time. I'll look > forward to your contributions again. I see you know Chris and others > already too. > > --- Tep Sastri wrote: > > I became member # 480 a moment ago, when the newest message > > number shown was 39,820. That's mean it is impossible for me to catch > > with what happened since day 1 here. Perhaps a quick review of 50 - > > 100 messages back should be adequate. > > > > Any recommendation, please? > ... > Yes, we've all been busy here in your absence;-). Lots of new faces for > you to get to know. I suggest you (and any other new members) just start > your own threads and then pick up others slowly according to your > interests. > > If you wish to ever read through parts of the archives like a novel, the > best way to do this is at the back up site: > http://www.dhammastudygroup.org/ > > Here, you can scroll through easily (off-line if you download) without any > ads. > > In case you are confused at all, there are two on-going texts (in addition > to Htoo's series): > > 1) Visuddhimagga, ch XiV posted by Larry in installments with Nina's > summary from the Tika (commentary). They're always delighted if anyone > joins in with queeries, comments or even disagreements! > > 2) 'Cetasikas' by Nina which I'm posting in short installments. At the > moment we're working through the Universal Cetasikas - phassa, vedana, > sanna and now cetana. I'm always glad when friends chip in here in any > shape or form too. > > Let us know if you have any other qus or comments. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ========= 39855 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 11:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same', TG, Suan. Hi TG, op 15-12-2004 22:08 schreef TGrand458@a... op TGrand458@a...: Lets go first to the Dhammasangani, English, p. 342, 343. , but this is a transl of arupa. Do you have the Pali, that is much better. Then p. 341: form (rupa) and nibbana are without objects of thought. Expositor, p. 501. You will see: explaining meanings of nama. The nama-khandhas bend towards(namati) the object and cause one another to bend towards the object. Nibbana bends kusala cittas onto itself by means of the causal relation of the dominant influence of object. Nina. > I have the Expositor, a page number would be great if anyone has it handy. I > find the above description fascinating. > > A Nama that doesn't experience? I guess that's like a Rupa that doesn't have > the Four Great Elements. ;-) 39856 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 11:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] good health. Dear Azita, I am glad to see you again, I was thinking about you. op 16-12-2004 01:55 schreef gazita2002 op gazita2002@y...: > If this is the case, then the opposite must be: akusala is bad > health. N: In her book on the perfections Kh. Sujin also says that we are like sick people who cannot travel. But on our long journey to the other shore we need the perfections as a medicine. >A: When the sense of urgency arises, I wonder if its kusala or if > its aversion to the idea of continuing endlessly in Samsara, but of > course only the development of right understanding of the presently > arising dhammas will ever really know. 'I' can't, there is no 'I' N: It is good you remind us that a sense of urgency can also be a kind of fear, and that only direct understanding can know. Best wishes for your health, Nina. 39857 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 11:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Hello from Member #480 Dear Tep and Htoo, Tep, Htoo mentioned your name sometimes and I had the impression that you both had very good and useful Dhamma conversations. Welcome, nice to have you here. Looking forward to your input. Nina. op 15-12-2004 23:09 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...:> > You are warmly welcome. I would like to recommend to read useful > messages and give your comments on them here. 39858 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 11:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: D.O. avija -> sankharas Hi Agrios, I use the PTS edition, hardcover. It is the second book of the Kindred Sayings (This has five books). ATI may have it on line. Perhaps Chrisitine could give you a link. Nina. op 16-12-2004 15:14 schreef agriosinski op agriosinski@y...: 39859 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 11:42am Subject: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi Phil, Phil: just like the time you asked Jon if he was sure he wasn't in the service of Mara! (I'm afraid I've never been able to see him quite the same way since....) James: LOL! I don't think I asked if he was in the `service' of Mara; that makes him sound like a devil worshipper or something! ;-) I believe I asked him if he was being unduly influenced by Mara (or something to that effect)- because of his rather dogmatic insistence that the Mindfulness of Breathing Sutta wasn't really about mindfulness of breathing (it seems to be just too obvious to me to be a difference of opinion). But anyway, we are all influenced by Mara so you really shouldn't see Jon any differently because of my question. I am influenced by Mara, you are influenced by Mara, even Kh. Sujin is influenced by Mara! We are all dancing with the devil! ;-)) The Buddha taught that the only way for the unenlightened to escape the influence of Mara, when Mara cannot read the mind and cause havoc, is during jhana. There's another good reason to cultivate Jhana! ;-) Metta, James 39860 From: Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 7:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same', TG, Suan. Hi, Nina (and TG) - In a message dated 12/16/04 2:18:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: > > Hi TG, > op 15-12-2004 22:08 schreef TGrand458@a... op TGrand458@a...: > Lets go first to the Dhammasangani, English, p. 342, 343. form>, but this is a transl of arupa. Do you have the Pali, that is much > better. > Then p. 341: form (rupa) and nibbana are without objects of thought. > Expositor, p. 501. You will see: explaining meanings of nama. The > nama-khandhas bend towards(namati) the object and cause one another to bend > towards the object. Nibbana bends kusala cittas onto itself by means of the > causal relation of the dominant influence of object. > Nina. > >I have the Expositor, a page number would be great if anyone has it handy. > I > >find the above description fascinating. > > > >A Nama that doesn't experience? I guess that's like a Rupa that doesn't > have > >the Four Great Elements. ;-) > > =================== If I may add a personal observation: I don't think that all namas must take an object. Nibbana is an instance of a nama that does not. I think there are other instances as well; for example, I don't think emotions such as happiness, sadness - emotional states of mind, in general - always have objects. If I'm "feeling blue", that sadness need not have an object, though, of course, it has a cause. I'm not at all sure that thoughts have objects in the sense of actual arammanas. To me, a nama is exactly whatever is knowable *only* through the mind door. Of course, the rupa of "water" is, according to Abhidhamma, an exception to my rule. But what good rule doesn't have an exception!! ;-)) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39861 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 0:11pm Subject: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Friend Sarah (and Herman), Sarah: The texts suggest that visible objects are the most commonly experienced, followed by sounds and this is how it would seem to me. James: I am not so sure that "seeing" is the most important sense sphere simply because it is listed first in the traditional listing, often times in suttas the most important element is listed last. This makes sense because at the end of a rather lengthy list, the last item is going to be the one which remains most fresh in the minds of the listeners and would be the one the Buddha wanted to emphasize most. In this case, "Intellect and Ideas" is traditionally listed last in the six sense spheres. From my perspective, "Intellect and Ideas" is much more significant and occurs more frequently than "Eye and Forms". It just makes more sense to me. Metta, James 39862 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 0:36pm Subject: Re: Vism.XIV,124 Dear Larry, Sadhu Sadhu Sadhu! Consciousness aggregates happen in this way, how amazing! It arises and passes away. Another thrones and disappears. Next appears and falls away. But Arahatta cuti citta stops the circle. So clear. Thanks. With Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV > > 124. And after death there is rebirth-linking again; and after > rebirth-linking, life-continuum. Thus the conscious continuity of beings > who hasten through the kinds of becoming, destiny, station [of > consciousness], and abode [of beings] occurs without break. But when a > man attains Arahantship here, it ceases with the cessation of his death > consciousness. > > This is the section of the detailed explanation dealing with the > consciousness aggregate. 39863 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 0:57pm Subject: Dhamma Thread (181) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 14 functions of consciousness. There are 14 functions of citta. The first 8 functions have been discussed in the previous post. They are 1.linking, 2.life-continueing, 3.adverting, 4.seeing, 5.hearing, 6.smelling, 7.tasting, 8.touching. These functions are carried by separate consciousness or citta. No 2 cittas will not be identical and there are a lot of variations. But when we think of character, we will see that there are 89 kinds of consciousness or 89 cittas. Different cittas ( of 89 cittas ) perform different functions. But when their functions are categorized, there will be only 14 functions of citta. So far we have discussed on the first 8 functions. 9th function is receiving function ( sampaticchana kicca ). There is a flow og bhavanga cittas. There arises a rupa. There arises another rupa. The first rupa serves as arammana or object. The second rupa serves as sense door. Both arise at the exact time. As rupa serving as arammmana or object is a clear one, the work of rupa as an object becomes evident in 2nd momental life of arisen rupa. Even those rupa arises and is serving as an object, bhavanga cittas or life continuums are still flowing and they have to arrest and stop at the completion of the 3rd momental life of rupa. Now the rupa approaches its 4th momental life. In the 4th moment, adverting consciousness arises and it adverts the object to next consciousness pancavinnana citta or 5-sense- consciousness. Depending on the rupa which serves as an object, its respective sense-consciousness will arise and will stay for the whole 5th moment. Then it falls away and 5th momental life of rupa lapses. Now it sets in 6th moment. As 5th moment passes away, pancavinnana citta or 5-sense- consciousness passes away. But the object is taken by the next arising citta called sampaticchana citta. This citta just receives the object which has been sensed by pancavinnana citta or 5-sense- consciousness. This new citta,sampaticchana citta or receiving consciousness takes the whole 6th moment and then passes away. Now the rupa becomes 6 moments old and approaches the 7th moment. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39864 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 1:09pm Subject: Dhamma Thread (182) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 14 functions of consciousness. There are 14 functions of citta. The first 9 functions have been discussed in the previous post. They are 1.linking, 2.life-continueing, 3.adverting, 4.seeing, 5.hearing, 6.smelling, 7.tasting, 8.touching, and 9.receiving functions. Now the rupas both rupa which serves as an object and rupa which serves as a sense-base or sense-door become 6 moments old and they both approach their 7th moment of life. The receiving consciousness passes away at the end of the 6th moment. Next arise another citta or consciousness called santirana citta. While sampaticchana citta or receiving consciousness just receives the object, santirana citta explores the object. It investigates what the object is like, what it is, how it is and so on. So it is called investigating consciousness. This function can be done by one of 3 santirana cittas. They do the 10th function. Again this citta called 'santirana citta' or investigating consciousness passes away and 7th moment also passes away. Now both rupa of object and rupa of sense-base become 7 moments old and they are approaching their 8th moment of life. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39865 From: gazita2002 Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 1:12pm Subject: Is there seeing now? Re: kusala and akusala. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Hi Phil, .....snip..... But anyway, we are all influenced by > Mara so you really shouldn't see Jon any differently because of my > question. I am influenced by Mara, you are influenced by Mara, even > Kh. Sujin is influenced by Mara! We are all dancing with the > devil! ;-)) The Buddha taught that the only way for the > unenlightened to escape the influence of Mara, when Mara cannot read > the mind and cause havoc, is during jhana. There's another good > reason to cultivate Jhana! ;-) > > Metta, James Hello James and Phil, Sure, but jhanas are conditioned and impermanent just like every other reality [except Nibbana]. As soon as jhanacittas fall away there are conditions for akusala [Mara] to arise and 'have its way'. I see no protection in the jhanas, at least not any lasting protection from Mara. IMHO it can only come from realizing the truth in the dhammas that arise and fall in this present moment. Why run away from this reality and go 'create' another one, in a sense. If the jhanas were part of 'my' accumulations, then I would probably be 'doing' Jhana, or rather jhanacittas would be arising and falling away now. THat doesn't appear to be the case, so I'm content to develop the awareness and understanding of this very moment, seeing, hearing, flavour, hardness, pain etc. Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita. 39866 From: Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 8:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same', TG, Suan. In a message dated 12/16/2004 11:18:01 AM Pacific Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: Hi TG, op 15-12-2004 22:08 schreef TGrand458@a... op TGrand458@a...: Lets go first to the Dhammasangani, English, p. 342, 343. , but this is a transl of arupa. Do you have the Pali, that is much better. Then p. 341: form (rupa) and nibbana are without objects of thought. Expositor, p. 501. You will see: explaining meanings of nama. The nama-khandhas bend towards(namati) the object and cause one another to bend towards the object. Nibbana bends kusala cittas onto itself by means of the causal relation of the dominant influence of object. Nina. Hi Nina I read the references and thanks. To me it sounds like people trying to describe how it works, but don't really know. For myself, I don't think Nibbana bends anything or that it is anything to be bent towards. Conditions support suffering. Nibbana is a term (not a thing or place) that describes -- conditions that are "put out." It is only a "reality" in the sense that "conditions can be put out." Its not a thing of itself. To describe Nibbana as "engaged" with conditions, at any level, to any degree; is to make it a "something." In my mind, that goes against the grain of what the Buddha taught in the Suttas. TG 39867 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 1:25pm Subject: Dhamma Thread (183) Dear Dhamma Friends, In a life, the first citta to arise is linking consciousness or patisandhi citta and the last to arise is cuti citta or dying consciousness. Linking is the 1st function and dying is the last function of citta. As there are 14 functions of citta, cuti citta will do the 14th function. We have discussed on the first 10 functions in the previous post. They are 1.linking, 2.life-continueing, 3.adverting, 4.seeing, 5.hearing, 6.smelling, 7.tasting, 8.touching, 9.receiving, and 10.investigating functions. Now the rupas both 'rupa which serves as an object' and 'rupa which serves as a sense-base or sense-door' become 7 moments old and they both approach their 8th moment of life. The investigating consciousness passes away at the end of the 7th moment. After that next arises another citta or consciousness called votthapana citta or determining consciousness. While santirana citta or investigating consciousness just explores and investigates the object, votthappana citta or determining consciousness decides or determines how the next arising cittas should behave. This citta do the 11th function. This 11th function called determing function or votthapana kicca is done by manodvaravajjana citta or mind-sense-door-adverting consciousness of 89 cittas. This citta called 'votthapana citta' or determining consciousness passes away and 8th moment also passes away. Now both rupa of object and rupa of sense-base become 8 moments old and they are approaching their 9th moment of life. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39868 From: Egbert Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 2:01pm Subject: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi Sarah and James and all, > Hi Herman, > > > Just by way of complement/contrast, modern science holds that > > hearing is the "first" sense, in that it is the first to develop in > > the womb, and the last to disappear in the final stages of death. > > (Rites for the dying all around the world acknowledge this fact) > .... > S: I'm not sure there is necessarily any conflict here.... > .... I agree, no conflict, but James raised a worthwhile point.... > > > > It is also considered the most immediate sense, in that there is no > > escaping sound. The eyes may be closed so that unwanted sights can > > be excluded, but no matter how one averts the head, sound is there. > .... > S: I hear you, Herman. We can only say 'sound is there' when it is heard. > Of course, this seems to be all the time, but it isn't. Sense and mind > door processes follow each other so rapidly and whilst it seems there is > seeing, hearing and thinking at the same time, we know this isn't true. > The texts suggest that visible objects are the most commonly experienced, > followed by sounds and this is how it would seem to me. I see what you mean :-) This seems like an appropriate spot to make the following point, which has been stewing for a few years (perhaps a bit overcooked by now :-)) Seeing is the knowing of visible object, hearing the knowing of sound etc. This is immediate, unmediated, non-reflexive. Knowing seeing, or knowing hearing etc is not-immediate, it is mediated, it is reflexive, it is the knowing of a knowing, it is consciousness of a consciousness. Visible object, sound etc is its own knowing. When it is said that cittas are so fast and short-lived, this is said relative to another level, namely the knowing of seeing or the knowing of hearing. When Freud posited the unconscious, he meant that the unconscious was unconscious relative only to the ego, not to itself. That the mind-generated ego is aware (consciousness of consciousness) of only one consciousness at a time does not mean there is only one consciousness at a time. From the ability of people to drive through a maze of fast-moving objects, whilst being reflexively aware of only their next post to dsg, it is clear that there is a level of knowing which operates very effectively without needing to be known again by itself. What are visible object and sound other than visible object and sound? Are they something lesser than what they are before they are known as having been seen or heard? This is not a metaphysical question. But there is room to doubt the validity of any suggestion that sound becomes sound by virtue of being heard (reflexively in a secondary consciousness) or likewise that visible object becomes so by virtue of being seen. The need for liberation is the need to be liberated from the clutching at reflexive knowing of what has already been and gone and been duly known by itself. Comments very welcome. > > Which sense are we most attached to or proliferate most about? I'm sure > there are individual differences here. Good point! I don't know how long you've been following > the discussions, but I can try to find the posts on this that we wrote if you like. Thanks, but I wouldn't worry about it :-) > > I know you don't like to be welcomed back, Herman, so I'll just say it's > been noted;-). :-) Kind Regards Herman > > Metta, > > Sarah > ====== 39869 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 3:37pm Subject: Is there seeing now? Re: kusala and akusala. Hello Azita,(James, Phil) all, Good post Azita. Imo, in jhana (a pleasant abiding), temporary suppression of defilements occurs - not eradication. Eradication requires seeing things as they really are, insight wisdom. So many of the suttas have as their last line: "Then Mara the Evil One -- sad & dejected at realizing, "[name of arahant/disciple] knows me" -- vanished right there." Here is just one example: http://www.mahindarama.com/e-tipitaka/sn5-10.htm metta and peace, Christie ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "gazita2002" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" > wrote: > > > > Hi Phil, > .....snip..... > > But anyway, we are all influenced by > > Mara so you really shouldn't see Jon any differently because of my > > question. I am influenced by Mara, you are influenced by Mara, > even > > Kh. Sujin is influenced by Mara! We are all dancing with the > > devil! ;-)) The Buddha taught that the only way for the > > unenlightened to escape the influence of Mara, when Mara cannot > read > > the mind and cause havoc, is during jhana. There's another good > > reason to cultivate Jhana! ;-) > > > > Metta, James > > Hello James and Phil, > > Sure, but jhanas are conditioned and impermanent just like every > other reality [except Nibbana]. As soon as jhanacittas fall away > there are conditions for akusala [Mara] to arise and 'have its way'. > I see no protection in the jhanas, at least not any lasting > protection from Mara. > IMHO it can only come from realizing the truth in the dhammas > that arise and fall in this present moment. Why run away from this > reality and go 'create' another one, in a sense. > > If the jhanas were part of 'my' accumulations, then I would > probably be 'doing' Jhana, or rather jhanacittas would be arising and > falling away now. THat doesn't appear to be the case, so I'm content > to develop the awareness and understanding of this very moment, > seeing, hearing, flavour, hardness, pain etc. > > Patience, courage and good cheer, > Azita. 39870 From: Tep Sastri Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 4:49pm Subject: [dsg] Re: A Hello from Member #480 Dear Mrs. Van Gorkom, Thank you very much for being so kind to write me this nice welcome message. My knowledge of the Dhamma, especially the Abhidhamma, simply looks so small when you are around; something like a candle's light being overwhelmed by the sun. Indeed, I am the one who looks forward to reading your posts (both old and new ones) in order to learn more Dhamma that I have not learned before. With deepest respect, Tep ============= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Tep and Htoo, > Tep, Htoo mentioned your name sometimes and I had the impression that you > both had very good and useful Dhamma conversations. Welcome, nice to have > you here. Looking forward to your input. > Nina. > op 15-12-2004 23:09 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...:> > > You are warmly welcome. I would like to recommend to read useful > > messages and give your comments on them here. 39871 From: Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 1:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Is there seeing now? Re: kusala and akusala. Hi, Azita - In a message dated 12/16/04 4:21:49 PM Eastern Standard Time, gazita2002@y... writes: > If the jhanas were part of 'my' accumulations, then I would > probably be 'doing' Jhana, or rather jhanacittas would be arising and > falling away now. THat doesn't appear to be the case, so I'm content > to develop the awareness and understanding of this very moment, > seeing, hearing, flavour, hardness, pain etc. > ====================== If you have worked on cultivation of jhanas, consistently and intensely, but have made no progress, then, indeed, they may not be "your thing" at this time. However, if you have not attempted to cultivate them, I would say that there is no reason to presume that you have no knack for them. In any case, the Buddha certainly recommended their cultivation as something very much worth doing, and, so, it might be worthwhile to not readily dismiss them simply due to their not being permanent states. They do serve to usefully cultivate the mind, making it a fit tool. Also, if you think about it, neither is path consciousness permanent! ;-)) So dismissal on the basis of impermanence is not such a great idea. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39872 From: plnao Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 6:19pm Subject: The 37 factors as Fourth Noble Truth? Heresy or helpful? Hello all These days I'm thinking about something I was discussing with James. Why is it that my "mind doesn't leap up" when it comes to The Noble Eightfold Path? These days I'm wondering if the 37 factors (I forget the Pali) which includes the Noble Eightfold Path doesn't inspire me more directly as a Fourth Noble Truth. The 4 Right Efforts, for example (included in the 37 factors) make my mind leap up and lead to practice here and now in a way that the Noble Eightfold Path doesn't, for some reason. Anyways, that's what I'm thinking about today. A passage from SN XXII81: Then Ven. Ananda went with those monks to where the Blessed One was staying in Parileyyaka, at the root of the Auspicious Sal Tree, and on arrival, after bowing down to him, sat to one side. As they were sitting there, the Blessed One instructed, urged, roused, & encouraged them with a talk on Dhamma. Now, on that occasion this train of thought appeared in the awareness of one of the monks: "Now I wonder -- knowing in what way, seeing in what way, does one without delay put an end to the effluents?" The Blessed One, perceiving with his awareness the train of thought in the monk's awareness, said to the monks, "I have analyzed & taught you the Dhamma, monks. I have analyzed & taught you the four frames of reference, the four right exertions, the four bases of power, the five faculties, the five strengths, the seven factors for Awakening, & the noble eightfold path. And yet, even though I have analyzed & taught you the Dhamma, still there appears this train of thought in the awareness of one of the monks: 'Now I wonder -- knowing in what way, seeing in what way, does one without delay put an end to the effluents?' (BTW, that final question is a nice one to leave hanging for you! :) ) I note that the Buddha defines his teaching in terms of these 37 factors rather than the Eightfold Noble Path alone. I am feeling that while the Eightfold Path points at our destination, these 37 factors point at a practice that can be developed (patiently, of course, without hunger for results) in order to move towards that destination. I wonder if anyone else has ever wondered about this. Why does the Buddha defines his teaching in these terms to the monks in this sutta, and why doesn't he do so in his exposition of The Four Noble Truths. If a person were to take these 37 factors as his or her Fourth Noble Truth rather than The Eightfold Noble Path alone, what would the dangers or benefits be? To me, these 37 factors feel much more inspiring and "mind-leaps up"-ing than the Eightfold Noble Path alone. BTW, it seems that Naomi has decided that it is time to tackle the problem we've been having with our computer, so she is disabling all our programs. I don't know the details, but we'll be off e-mail while we do this, and... ...anyways, I will be away for a while, or so it seems. Or perhaps the problem with be fixed tout de suite. In case it takes longer, wishing you all well, and welcome to our new member Tep. Metta, Phil 39873 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 9:25pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 76- Volition/cetanaa (f) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.4 Volition(cetanaa]contd] ***** Akusala cetanå and kusala cetanå can have many intensities, they can be coarse or more subtle. When they are more subtle they do not motivate kamma pathas, courses of action, through body, speech or mind. For example, when we like our food there is lobha-múla-citta and it is accompanied by akusala cetanå. Although the lobha-múla-citta does not motivate an unwholesome course of action, it is not kusala but akusala; it is different from kusala citta with generosity, from kusala citta which observes síla or from kusala citta which applies itself to mental development. Whenever we do not apply ourselves to dåna, síla or bhåvanå, we act, speak or think with akusala cittas. Thus, there is likely to be akusala citta very often in a day, since the moments we apply ourselves to kusala are very rare. There is likely to be akusala citta when we take hold of objects, eat, drink or talk. When we laugh there is lobha-múla citta. We may not realize that there is akusala citta when the degree of akusala does not have the intensity of harming others, but in fact there are countless moments of akusala citta. ***** [Ch.4 Volition(cetanaa) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 39874 From: ashkenn2k Date: Thu Dec 16, 2004 11:02pm Subject: Re: Letter to B.Bodhi-'The Jhânas and the Lay Disciple ..' Hi Sarah In the first place, we should ask are jhanas as described in the Nikayas towards the culimination of enlightement is mundane or supramundane. If the jhanas in MN are the same as mundane, then Buddha would have become enlighted much earlier when he study mundane arupas jhanas from his past two teachers before he was a Buddha. In MN 1 (which is loved by Rob M :-) ), Buddha talks about jhanas all the way to arupa jhanas and he says there is a difference between a worlding, a noble one (who have not yet reach Arahant), an Arahant and Buddha himself. It is very clear in that sutta that even though a worlding can attain arupa jhanas or the 4th jhanas, he still will not fully understand as really it is. To exert that it is not supradmundane jhanas then the whole of Nikayas will be at stake because there are many instances where Buddha describe a difference between mundane and supramundane jhanas. Another sutta to show the difference A (IV, 123), The Jhanas and Rebirth <> [My note - this is the same till the four jhanas] I have still not discuss whether is right concentration just only jhanas - there are many suttas quote about right concentration - that is for another dicussion, if we wish to explore it further. Ken O 39875 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 0:42am Subject: Suravira (was : Problems in My Understanding Re: [dsg] Contact/TG) Dear Suravira, You made a number of interesting comments in a post under this subject heading to Howard, et al#38971 I meant to respond at the time, but was rather hoping others would be;-). I'll just list a number of points that I think need clarification and be happy to discuss any of them further. I apologize in advance for any misunderstanding - sometimes I'm not always clear on your meaning. You were referring in part to a book of Sujin's translated by Nina, maybe 'Survey of Paramattha Dhammas'?? (Pls post any extracts for discussion if it helps). ***** 1. You mention that in some translations, 'absolute reality' is 'promoted as 'the truth' '. Absolute reality (paramattha dhamma) refers to what truly arises and falls at this very moment as we speak. The words are not important, but seeing, hearing, like, dislike, feeling and so on are all examples. 2. You say 'conventional reality' is 'addressed as if it were debased relative to 'absolute reality' '. A cup, a person, a tree are conventional realities. I have no idea about them being 'debased' but they are not 'absolute realities' that can be directly experienced. 3.You say that 'as we refine perception (panna) through the bodhisattva discipline of meditation, our awareness of the nature of paramattha dhammas, as they arise and fall away, becomes enhanced.' I'd just like to stress that the Buddha did not encourage us to 'refine.....through the bodhisattva.......'. He taught us to develop understanding and awareness of the paramattha dhammas directly when they appear. 4. You refer to abiding inside and outside a state of insight with a different mode of consciousness and false views abating for a moment at stream entry. At stream entry, as you know well, false views are eradicated for good. So, yes, a sotapanna uses a 'conventional perspective of truth' but no wrong views associated with them. 5.You continue to talk about the subject-object duality and I get rather lost. I'd just like to stress that the realities, the paramattha dhammas of life, are the same regardless of whether there is any understanding of them or not. Seeing or hearing are seeing and hearing whether or not there is ever any awareness of knowing about them or not. 6. You say 'the conventional and absolute are NOT separate'. Again, I'm missing your point. Hearing, sound and ideas of a sound are all quite different and separate. The various ideas we have, the concepts about a sound, cover up the true realities. 7. You say it is 'within the conventional perspective that we undertake the refinement of perception so that we are capable of realizing the nature of paramattha dhammas'. This makes it sound as if realities can be known by thinking and by a self or 'we' doing something. Paramattha dhammas can only ever be known or realized by directly understanding their characteristics when they appear, now. 8.You go on to say that as unenlightened people, 'our perspective, intention and understanding are not rooted in this truth -nirvana'. However, when we're talking here about paramattha dhammas and the development of understanding, we're not talking about nibbana/nirvana. I think you are introducing Mahayana ideas into what you read in A.Sujin's books etc. Nibbana (the unconditioned reality) is eventually realized according to the Buddha's teaching by understanding conditioned realities for what they are. This is why there are 4 Noble Truths. 9. Again you say that 'our daily life forms upon the paramattha dhammas - forms upon nirvana'. The Buddha doesn't say that seeing or hearing 'form upon nirvana'. We cannot say this. Again, it's a Mahayana idea not found in the Tipitaka as I understand it. To be honest, it doesn't make any sense to me regardless of the source. 10. Finally, and the main point in what you wrote I think, you say that you object to the word 'reality' instead of 'perspective' which doesn't carry the same 'existential baggage'. It's true that no words are ideal. However, if we again use the examples of seeing, hearing, sound, like, dislike and so on, 'perspective' would suggest some idea or orientation. Seeing or hearing are 'real' and directly knowable at this very moment. They can be tested out and proven whereas a perspective will depend on our ideas only. We can just use 'dhamma' as others have suggested, but make it clear that it has nothing in this context to do with perspective or conventional/conceptual ideas. 11. Finally, in another post #38703, you asked me about feelings from 'Cetasikas' and Howard already responded. I think it's very important to clearly distinguish between namas and rupas. Feelings are always namas, so while it's true that usually there are pleasant feelings on account of pleasant objects and vice versa, I'm not sure we can talk about feelings 'conveying an aspect of the object' experienced. Seeing is accompanied by a neutral feeling only when it experiences a pleasant or unpleasant object. Subsequent pleasant and unpleasant feelings follow, but the seeing, the visible object and the feelings all have they own characteristics and conditions for arising. Metta, Sarah ====== 39876 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 1:38am Subject: Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... Hi Howard, … --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Warning to the casual reader: The following involves a lot of > technical analysis and theorizing that may well be disconcerting if not > outright > upsetting. …. S:;-) Anyway, I was glad to read it – I know you don’t mind if I’m slow to respond… …. > Howard: > If a conditioning force were a reality, not imagined, then it > would be > either rupa, citta, cetasika, or nibbana. …. S: Yes …. Also, a "conditioning force", > if > there were such a beast, would not itself be a relation, but a cause for > a > relation. …. S: Yes. Back to the intro to the Patthana: “Force (satti). It is that which has the power to bring about or accomplish…..the force of root condition (conditioning force) inherent in the state of greed, which is one of the six roots, cannot exist apart from that state.” In other words., the root condition is merely the nature or characteristic of lobha in this case. This root or lobha condition has the power to affect other cetasikas and cittas and also rupas. …. > In any case, notions of "conditioning forces" at the level of > reality > must be very suspect. The Buddha replaced the old, substantialist ideas > of > hidden forces of causality by conditionality, which simply comes down to > "When > this is, that is, and when this arises, that arises". This is part of > what > distinguished the Buddha's notion of idappaccayata from the > substantialist > causality theories of his predecessors. …. S: Yes, no problem. When there is lobha (as root condition), it has the power or force to bring about/condition various dhammas. No self or thing or essence involved. …. > ---------------------------------------------- > Howard: > The force of greed cannot exist apart from *what* state? Greed > cannot > exist apart from greed? I don't get what is being said here. … S: If there is no greed, there is conditioning factor or force of greed. That’s all. It’s just to show that the conditioning force is not a mere concept separate from the reality. …. >If by > "state" is > meant the citta as mindstate, as opposed to citta as the operation of > awareness (vi~n~nana), then what exactly is a mindstate? …. S: In this example, it was referring to lobha, the cetasika or root. There cannot be a greedy citta which is not rooted in lobha. …. >It seems to be > a collection > consisting of co-occurring awareness (citta in the 1st sense - > vi~n~nana), > cetasikas, and arammana. But any collection is pa~n~natti. Is then the > root > condition of greed, as a relation, a relation between a nama dhamma > (greed) and a > pa~n~natti (the mindstate)? In any case, the *force* of greed, whatever > sort of > thing that is supposed to be, is not itself a relation. It seems to me > that no > matter how any of this matter is turned, it doesn't bear scrutiny very > well. …. S: See above;-). The relation is nothing other than the conditioning ‘state’ (here lobha) and the conditioned ‘state’, here lobha too. To give an analogy (which may or may not work) – the relation between me and my little great niece is a concept we use for convenience. Really, it’s just a way of explaining the particular connection between me and the baby only. In the case of lobha conditioning lobha, the’ relation’ is a concept based on the characteristics of the realities involved. ------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Okay, so the "force" terminology is superfluous. We are talking > about > greed. What is the greed related to by the greed-root-relation, and in > exactly > what way? That is - what exactly is the relation being talked about, and > is > that relation merely concept or is it reality? If it is reality, it must > fall > into one of the categories of rupa, citta, cetasika, and nibbana. > ----------------------------------------- .... S: As I said, the relation is a concept based on the nature and function of these particular realities. You often rightly refer to how namas cannot arise without rupas in the sense sphere realm. This is another example of conditions. Seeing (a nama) has to experience visible object (a rupa) and has to have eye-base as support. We speak about the relations or various conditions involved conceptually, but in fact they are all aspects of the dhammas involved. The nature of seeing is that it needs various ‘supports’ in order to arise. This is not imagined. …. > Howard: > Ahh, okay. Here we are starting to zero-in on matters. There is > nothing more than the conditioning and conditioned states. That means > that *there > are no relations*. There are relations only in a manner of speaking. …. S: Yes – just like the analogy of me and the great niece. …. > Relations > are (well grounded) concepts, and nothing more. Okay. That may well be > so! > Relations may well be not events of the type I hypothesized, > multi-phenomenal and > often trans-temporal events. But, then, they are actually nothing at > all. We > can make true statements of syntactically relational form about dhammas, > but we > may not countenance such "things" as actual relations. I will definitely > buy > that! …. S: Good! At the same time, I don’t think we should underestimate what deepened insight can know directly about these particular aspects of realities, such as their conditioned nature. Without the right causes, they cannot come to be. …. >But what does that tell us about concepts? It says to me that at > least > until we are arahants, there is no proper grasping of reality that does > not > indispensably depend on concepts. > ------------------------------------------------ …. S: We need to use concepts to explain and discuss, but at moments of awareness, no concept involved. By developing awareness and understanding, we’ll be less and less reliant on conceptual understanding. …. > Howard: > Okay. But look at what would be not known without the concepts > that > take us beyond these dhammas to their characteristics and the relations > among > them. The so called characteristics "to be conditioned, function and > manifest" > in certain ways (of the dhamma, greed, for example) are not the dhamma > itself. > These are to be known by inference by us. Moreover, these > characteristics are > actually nothing at all - as you say. They are concept only. All there > actually are are the dhammas (e.g., greed). … S: Again. let me stress that many of the details we read about with regard to the complexities of conditional relations can only ever be fully understood by a Buddha and maybe a few key disciples. Everything is taught, but not because it all has to be directly known. However, these characteristics or truths about dhammas such as the way they are conditioned, function and manifest, are not mere concepts. They are inherent in the dhammas being referred to. For example, the accumulating aspect of lobha each time it arises is a truth about it which can be directly known when it arises, if panna has been developed. In our own simple way, we can prove it in daily life. Like Phil gave the example before on reflecting or dwelling on anger, I think, and how it just let to more thinking and dwelling on anger. …. > Howard: > Okay. So you agree that contiguity relation is pa~n~natti. … S: I don’t think I agreed that;-). It’s pannatti now as we discuss it, but the law of cittas following cittas is not merely pannatti, it is their nature to condition each other. …. >That > looks > to me like pa~n~natti are essential aspects of "reality", no? …. S: No. …. >If we > throw out > pa~n~natti as mere illusion, then we throw out the tilakkhana and all > properties and relations. …. S: No, …. >Doesn't it start to seem to you, Sarah, that > all this > analysis is an empty house of cards, and that no matter how we try to > describe > reality, the description falls apart? … S: No;-) … > It does to me. All that I am > starting to see > left is that this is a world of empty appearance, with nothing to hold > onto, > nothing independent, nothing substantial or self-existent, and all > worthy only > of relinquishment. (Nagarjuna is looking more and more attractive to me > at > this moment.) … S: This is mere thinking and more pannatti – nothing to do with understanding dhammas (realities), my main objection to Nagarjuna from the little I’ve read. …. S:> > The relation or niyama is merely a way of describing the cittas and > > cetasikas (4 or the 5 khandhas), to explain one of the ways in which > they > > are conditioned to arise. The conditioned nature is an integral aspect > of > > all dhammas (apart from nibbana) and is clearly comprehended directly > (not > > by thinking or calculating) at the second stage of insight. > > > > To stress, there is no relation apart from the relating and related > > realities (paramattha dhammas) here. > > > -------------------------------------- > Howard: > Okay. I buy that! :-) > -------------------------------------- S: Wow! Time to stop;-_ … > Howard: > In a way, I feel obliged to apologize for pushing with regard to > these > matters. I'm afraid it may be upsetting to some. But I feel that it is > important to scrutinize carefully, and to seriously question in this > area. I see > some real problems here, and not the least of them being the inherent > inadequacy > in all analytical, conceptual, inferential schemes, including > Abhidhamma. > ------------------------------------- … S: Howard, I honestly don’t know why any of this would be in the slightest bit upsetting to anyone here. I think it’s a good and important topic and you’re raising excellent questions – all ones I’ve sstruggle with raised with K.Sujin in the past too. (I’m not suggesting I have all the answers now, and appreciate the opportunity to reflect further with you). Discussing such areas and aspects of the Abhidhamma (and the rest of the Tipitaka of course) is just what we’re all here for. Metta, Sarah p.s I liked your comments to Antony on guarding the sense doors #39558 Re the film you mentioned, we can see the extremes of wrong view and practice! I’m glad ‘the implication was that his efforts were poorly directed’. Middle Way understanding again, rather than moving around the deck-chairs or poking out eyes in the extreme. ========= 39877 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 2:25am Subject: Is there seeing now? Re: kusala and akusala. Friend Azita, Azita: I see no protection in the jhanas, at least not any lasting protection from Mara. James: These are two different statements: 1. I see no protection the the jhanas; 2. I see no lasting protection in the jhanas. Concerning number one, this is a false statement. The jhanas do provide protection from Mara. The Buddha taught that the jhanas make Mara "blind". Concerning the second statement, I agree with you that they don't provide lasting protection, only enlightenment provides lasting protection. However, until enlightenment, some protection is better than none, right? Azita: IMHO it can only come from realizing the truth in the dhammas that arise and fall in this present moment. Why run away from this reality and go 'create' another one, in a sense. James: The jhanas make the mind strong and pliable to do the work of seeing the dhammas of the present moment, that one of the reasons why the Buddha extolled his bhikkhus and laypeople to practice them. Not only that, sometimes the worldling would like to take a break from this banal existence and the jhanas would be a much better alternative than drugs and alcohol, right? Azita: If the jhanas were part of 'my' accumulations, then I would probably be 'doing' Jhana, or rather jhanacittas would be arising and falling away now. James: I'm not sure who told you this (Kh. Sujin?) but it isn't true. Jhana doesn't arise spontaneously; jhana takes proper effort and a concentration subject (kasina) which would be most appropriate for your accumulations. Azita: THat doesn't appear to be the case, so I'm content to develop the awareness and understanding of this very moment, seeing, hearing, flavour, hardness, pain etc. James: Okay. If you are content with that level of awareness (mundane) then I wish you luck in your practice. However, I hope that you haven't reached this decision because you have sold yourself short based on false information. Metta, James 39878 From: AlanLam Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 2:17am Subject: Re: Letter to B.Bodhi-'The Jhânas and the Lay Disciple ..' --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ashkenn2k" wrote: > > Hi Sarah > > In the first place, we should ask are jhanas as described in the > Nikayas towards the culimination of enlightement is mundane or > supramundane. If the jhanas in MN are the same as mundane, then > Buddha would have become enlighted much earlier when he study > mundane arupas jhanas from his past two teachers before he was a > Buddha. > > In MN 1 (which is loved by Rob M :-) ), Buddha talks about jhanas > all the way to arupa jhanas and he says there is a difference > between a worlding, a noble one (who have not yet reach Arahant), an > Arahant and Buddha himself. It is very clear in that sutta that even > though a worlding can attain arupa jhanas or the 4th jhanas, he > still will not fully understand as really it is. > > To exert that it is not supradmundane jhanas then the whole of > Nikayas will be at stake because there are many instances where > Buddha describe a difference between mundane and supramundane > jhanas. Another sutta to show the difference <.....> Hi Ken, I have read many of your interesting articles. I am in reply to your respond to Ms. Sarah on the following. Hope this exchange we could learn from each other, especially from you more. I am 100% in total agreement with you that if used 100% just only Jhaana, it leads one to nowhere, but just Bramah realm or the Heaven realm as described in various suttas, and your comments above too. I also fully do agree with you that if just Jhaanas itself, Buddha would have been enlightened with his previous 2 teachers. What I am saying here in my previous response, is to CHANGE TRACK once, after having achieved Jhaana to Vipassana. Here one need not have to achieve 2nd, 3rd or 4th Jhaana, but with either Access or Entering Concentration or with 1st Jhaana. For example, When one needs to cut a tree down faster and effectively, one needs a "HEAVY" Axe with a "SHARP" Edge. The 'HEAVINESS" being the "JHAANA" and the "SHARPNESS" being the "VIPASSANA". Ven. Mahasi taught the excellent way using "Access and or Entering Concentration", with just enough power to be mindful of the arising and dissolution of the 6-fold sense objects or the 5 objects of craving. When one's breath is very, very still and subtle, one's mind will be very mindfully alert and sharp. This is the right moment to then mindfull of all the arising and or dissolution of the Dharma factors. Before that when those objects does arise, one just comtemplate "mindful" , "mindful of sound", mindful of Vedhana", "mindfull of smell", mindfull of thoughts", Mindfull of sights" etc. without contemplating its rapid arsing and dissolution in details each object. The Vipassana path starts once the mind is still, clear and sharp. Yes, that's is the right moment then. As one pursue on with Vipassana mindfullness, and master over it, one will then eventually does achieve Jhaana while in the process of being mindful of those objects and subjects rapidly arising and dissolution, bbeing aggreagates and being NamRupa etc. Hence, what I was trying to convey above earlier, was implying that it is better to have Jhaana and then start to pursue Vipassana mindfullness. From your kind respond, it seems you did not perceive this criteria but just on the issue of sole Jhaana only. Thanking you in advance for your kind opinion. With best regards and Metta. Alan 39879 From: Egbert Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 3:04am Subject: [dsg] Re: Letter to B.Bodhi-'The Jhânas and the Lay Disciple ..' Dear Joop, Sorry for butting in here... > - In the third place is, in general terms, an orthodox view a 'greedy > view': difficult to be a partly Theravadin and combine that with > ideas of Mahayana, natural science and agnosticism. Of course it is > possible in this DSG, you have assured me but still it is difficult > with so much orthodoxy in the dsg that I think many times: I don't > belong in this Forum. If you don't belong here, than most of us don't. It is less and less that I get the idea that dsg is the vehicle for pushing a particular view, and more and more I get the idea there is an honest exchange happening here. ( I haven't heard anyone sputtering about the moderators for what seems like an eternity :-)) Personally, I appreciate your posts very much. I also respect greatly the Great Philosophical (deliberate capitals) Traditions in which you are obviously very well versed. If there was less of Joop here, there would be more orthodoxy. The conclusion is obvious :-) Kind Regards Herman 39880 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 3:46am Subject: Re: lost again :) Hi Agrios, I hope you don't mind me replying to the list. I quite understand, the references can be very confusing and they vary from one translation to the next. Sometimes the refs are to the Pali. --- agriosinski wrote: > could you please link for me your post Nina is reffering to > in D.O. avija -> sankhara thread? > The one with: > Sarah: So ignorance of dependent origination and of the inherent > unsatisfactoriness of all formations, including wholesome or > profitable > volitions, even of arupa jhanas, propels the cycle continuously from > moment to moment, life to life `like one who has lost his way and > takes > the road to a goblin city'. .... S: This reference of mine was from the Dispeller of Delusion (translation of the Sammohavinodanii), comy to the Vibhanga (Abhidhamma text, PTS,Classification of the Structure of Conditions, 662. At the end of the quote, it said: "This too is said: 'Not knowing, bhikkhus, as a bhikkhu's ignorance is abandoned and clear vision is arisen, bhikkhus, with the fading away of ignorance and the arising of clear vision he does not form even formations of merit' (cf Sii 82). As Nina, said, this is a reference to Samyutta Nikaya, Nidanasamyutta. In the B.Bodhi translation it's under V1 Suffering (or the Tree), 12:51(1), p.586: "Bhikkhus, if a person immersed in ignorance generates a meritorious volitional formation, consciousness fares on to the meritorious; if he generates a demeritorious......imperturbable......But when a bhikkhu has abandoned ignorance and aroused true knowledge, then, with the fading away of ignorance and the arising of true knowledge, he does not generate a meritorious volitional formation, or a demeritorious....imperturbable....Since he does not generate or fashion volitional formations, he does not cling to anything in the world. Not clinging, he is not agitated. Not being agitated, he personally attains Nibbana......" Agrios, there is a wealth of detail in the section of the Dispeller I quoted from before. I can try to find more if you have any particular qus/comments. Hope this helps. Excellent questions and I'm glad to look at the sutta. Metta, Sarah ======== 39881 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 5:40am Subject: Re: [dsg]Nibbana Hi TG, op 16-12-2004 22:17 schreef TGrand458@a... op TGrand458@a...:> > I read the references and thanks. To me it sounds like people trying to > describe how it works, but don't really know. For myself, I don't think > Nibbana bends anything or that it is anything to be bent towards. Conditions support > suffering. Nibbana is a term (not a thing or place) that describes -- > conditions that are "put out." It is only a "reality" in the sense that > "conditions can be put out." Its not a thing of itself. N: I agree with you. Nibbana is not a self. Only the term bending needs more clarification. The text is < Nibbana bends kusala cittas onto itself by means of the causal relation of the dominant influence of object.> The text only says that nibbana is the object of the citta that experiences it. It conditions citta by way of object-condition, object-predominance condiiton (Guide to Conditional Relations, u. Narada, p. 97), object strong dependence-condition. Thus, we should not think of something that does something. Nibbana is nama, it is not rupa. But it is not a conditioned nama like citta and cetasika. It does not experience an object, but it is experienced. That is all that the text explains, using the word namati, to bend. The Dhsg text repeats: asankhata dhatu: the unconditioned element. TG: To describe Nibbana as "engaged" with conditions, at any level, to any > degree; is to make it a "something." In my mind, that goes against the grain > of what the Buddha taught in the Suttas. N: Of course, nibbana is not doing something. When the time is ripe the unconditioned dhamma can be experienced by lokuttara cittas. As we read in the Visuddhimagga text, after the dying-consciousness of the arahat there are no more conditions for the traversing of the round. As you say: conditions are put out. Nina. 39882 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 5:40am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana Hi Howard, op 16-12-2004 21:09 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: ... I don't think that all namas must > take an object. Nibbana is an instance of a nama that does not. I think there > are other instances as well; for example, I don't think emotions such as > happiness, sadness - emotional states of mind, in general - always have > objects. If I'm "feeling blue", that sadness need not have an object, though, of > course, it has a cause. N: Cittas, feelings, emotions, arise and fall away incredibly fast. We cannot trace what object each of these experience. But they experience something, they are not dead matter. That something is an object. Feeling sad or uneasy: at such moments there is a combination of many sensations and these also condition bodily unpleasant feeling, such as a pain in the chest. We have immediately aversion of our aversion, then aversion is the object of annoyance. Or unhappy feeling is the object. We feel unhappy about unhappy feeling. When pañña can know dhammas that appear one at a time there will be more clarity. H: I'm not at all sure that thoughts have objects in the sense > of actual arammanas. > To me, a nama is exactly whatever is knowable *only* through the mind > door. N: Right, nama can only be known through the mind-door. H: Of course, the rupa of "water" is, according to Abhidhamma, an exception > to my rule. But what good rule doesn't have an exception!! > ;-)) N: Sense objects such as sound are known through a sense-door and then through the mind-door. But there are many other rupas that can be known only through the mind-door.Take for instance earsense. Seeing sees what is visible, hearing hears sound. It sounds simple, but it is difficult to have right understanding of nama and rupa. Still, it is basic for the development of insight. We hear this: Do we really understand this? Nina. 39883 From: nina Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 5:40am Subject: Vis. XIV, 124 and Tiika Vis. XIV, 124 and Tiika Vis. text: And after death there is rebirth-linking again; and after rebirth-linking, life-continuum. Thus the conscious continuity of beings who hasten through the kinds of becoming, destiny, station [of consciousness], and abode [of beings] occurs without break. N: ...of beings who hasten through the kinds of becoming, in Pali: sa.msaramaanaana.m sattaana.m. The word sa.msarati means:come again and again, traverse one life after the other. As to the words, the kinds of becoming, destiny, station [of consciousness], and abode [of beings], the Tiika mentions: three kinds of becoming, five destinies, six states of consciousness and nine abodes of beings, but it does not give details. These can be found elsewhere. In the Recital (D, III, p. 209, XXI): three planes of rebirth, bhava, : of sense desires, of ruupajhaana, of aruupajhaana. Five destinies, gati, : of hell, animal world, ghosts (petas), mankind, devas (Recital (D, III, p. 225). Six states of consciousness: Co to D. III, Recital, (p. 1034): seeing-consciousness, the kusala vipaaka and akusala vipaaka that is dependent on eyesense, and so for the other four sense-cognitions, and the sixth is mind-consciousness, mano-viññaa.na (see D III, p. 230, VI, 1). Nine abodes of beings, avaasa, : the place where they are reborn. The Gradual Sayings refers to some of these: the place of birth of men, of some devas, of demons, the brahma worlds where those are born who cultivated stages of ruupajhaana and aruupajhaana. The texts remind us of the danger of rebirth. We do not know which kamma will produce which kind of rebirth at a particular moment in the cycle. Vis. text: But when a man attains Arahantship here, it ceases with the cessation of his death consciousness. N: The Tiika explains that the word , etthaa, refers to the beimgs who go around in the cycle. Tiika text: as to the words, but he who has accomplished arahatship (yo pana arahatta.m paapu.naati) this means, by the right practice which is in accordance with it For the arahat there is indeed cessation because there is no more rebirth (tassa arahato niruddhameva hoti citta.m appa.tisandhikabhaavato). N: For the attainment of arahatship, there must be the right practice so that this goal can be reached. Paññaa has to be developed until it eradicates all latent tendencies. Vis. Text: This is the section of the detailed explanation dealing with the consciousness aggregate. N. Before we realize it the process of cittas is over, it is followed by bhavanga-cittas and then another process begins again. And so it is life after life. Until ignorance has been eradicated when arahatship is attained. The study of the processes of cittas and the bhavangacittas that arise in between teaches us that dhammas roll on without a doer. The Abhidhammattha Sangaha (T.A. p.212) compares this with the rolling on like the wheel of a cart in due order. <[They] occur, rolling on, until the roots of the round of rebirths are completely cut off...> This can give us a sense of urgency to develop understanding at this moment so that ignorance can be eradicated. Thus far the Vis. has dealt with the khandha of consciousness. We learnt about the different classifications of citta. They can be classified according to jaati or nature, as kusala, akusala, vipaaka and kiriya. They can be classified according to plane of citta, as sensuous plane, ruupa-jhaana citta, aruupajhaanacitta and lokuttara citta. They can be classified in accordance with the plane of existence where they arise, with the accompanying roots, hetus, with the accompanying feelings. They can be classified according to the functions they perform in the processes, and outside the processes. The Vis.XIV, 81 states: N: Citta and cetasikas are classified as four naama-khandhas, they are dhammas that experience an object. Citta cognizes an object and the accompanying cetasikas share the same object, but citta is the principal or forerunner in cognizing an object. The naama-khandhas that arise together are of the same nature (jaati) of kusala, akusala, vipaka or kiriya. They are of the same plane of citta: sense sphere, rupa-jhana, arupa-jhana or lokuttara. Thus, if the consciousness aggregate is understood first, the other three naama khandhas will be understood more easily. In the following sections the Vis. will deal with the other naama-khandhas which are the cetasikas. **** Nina 39884 From: jwromeijn Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 5:56am Subject: [dsg] Re: Letter to B.Bodhi-'The Jhânas and the Lay Disciple ..' --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Egbert" wrote: > > Dear Joop, > > If you don't belong here, than most of us don't. It is less and less > that I get the idea that dsg is the vehicle for pushing a particular > view, and more and more I get the idea there is an honest exchange > happening here. ( I haven't heard anyone sputtering about the > moderators for what seems like an eternity :-)) > > Personally, I appreciate your posts very much. I also respect > greatly the Great Philosophical (deliberate capitals) Traditions in > which you are obviously very well versed. If there was less of Joop > here, there would be more orthodoxy. The conclusion is obvious :-) > > Kind Regards > > Herman Dear Herman Thanks. I will not say again "perhaps I leave this dsg. I leave or leave not (or lurk a time, like you did) And, more important, I contnue my buddhistic path, with steps in Theravada and steps in Mahayana. And I( hope tot get to a western, a modern, a global, a critical Buddhism in one day Metta Joop 39885 From: Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 2:42am Subject: Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 12/17/04 4:39:58 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@y... writes: > Hi Howard, > … --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > Warning to the casual reader: The following involves a lot of > >technical analysis and theorizing that may well be disconcerting if not > >outright > >upsetting. > …. > S:;-) Anyway, I was glad to read it – I know you don’t mind if I’m slow to > respond… > …. > >Howard: > > If a conditioning force were a reality, not imagined, then it > >would be > >either rupa, citta, cetasika, or nibbana. > …. > S: Yes > …. > Also, a "conditioning force", > >if > >there were such a beast, would not itself be a relation, but a cause for > >a > >relation. > …. > S: Yes. Back to the intro to the Patthana: > > “Force (satti). It is that which has the power to bring about or > accomplish…..the force of root condition (conditioning force) inherent in > the state of greed, which is one of the six roots, cannot exist apart from > that state.â€? > > In other words., the root condition is merely the nature or characteristic > of lobha in this case. This root or lobha condition has the power to > affect other cetasikas and cittas and also rupas. > …. > > In any case, notions of "conditioning forces" at the level of > >reality > >must be very suspect. The Buddha replaced the old, substantialist ideas > >of > >hidden forces of causality by conditionality, which simply comes down to > >"When > >this is, that is, and when this arises, that arises". This is part of > >what > >distinguished the Buddha's notion of idappaccayata from the > >substantialist > >causality theories of his predecessors. > …. > S: Yes, no problem. When there is lobha (as root condition), it has the > power or force to bring about/condition various dhammas. No self or thing > or essence involved. > =========================== My understanding of your take on relations is the following: 1) It is a fact that conditions are such that the coming together of certain ones of them are occurrences that are necessary and sufficient for the arising, at the same time or later, of various other conditions. 2) Conditions (dhammas), together with their features, are what are realities. 3) The characteristics of some conditions to lead to others when in proper combination with other conditions, as well as the characteristics of some conditions to depend, for their arising, upon such other groups of conditions, are among the important features of dhammas. Relations, per se, are not realities, but are merely conventional ways of thinking and speaking about the conditioning and conditionable features of dhammas as outlined above. 4) The Patthana, while ostensibly about "conditional relations", is actually about dhammas and their characteristics of serving as conditions for other dhammas and as owing their existence to the simultaneous or earlier occurrence of other conditions. 5) When you speak of "forces" and the "power" to make other dhammas arise, this is only a manner of speaking. You are not presuming hidden, substantial forces and powers. This is just a way of speaking about conditionality in the sense of "when this is, that is. When this arises, that arises", where the conditionality is regular, dependable, and objective. (Again, I think of the example of a farmer explaining that a sprout has the power to grow into a plant, and then looking askance at the city dweller who asks him where in the sprout that power is to be found! ;-) If my understanding expressed above of your position is on target, then I do think that your position is quite reasonable and certainly quite Buddhist. Still I wonder a bit about possible alternatives that confer more than mere conventional reality to relations. It is certainly clear to me that general relations such as "temporal predecessor relation" and "cooccurrence relation" are merely well-founded concepts. For that matter, general rupas such as "hardness" and "warmth" and general dhammas such as "pleasant feeling" and "anger" are also merely well-founded concepts. Any specific hardness or warmth or pleasant feeling or anger is an actual experiential occurrence, and is not concept. Likewise, it seems possible to me that any specific co-occurring of dhammas and any specific preceding of a dhamma by another are experiential realities as well. I'm afraid that if we accord only 2nd class status to (concrete) relations, that is, to specific instances/occurrences of "relations", then we may be committing ourselves, except conventionally, to a static view of things. There is certainly a problem with reifying relations - there is no doubt about that. But there is also a problem with according them only conventional reality, which means actually denying them any existence at all from an ultimate perspective. I think there may be the need for some sort of middle-way perspective on this matter. One possible approach, that I'm not prepared at this point to dismiss outright, may be that of viewing concrete relations as kinds of real events, specifically multi-phenomenal events that occur either trans-temporally or uni-temporally, as compared to paramattha dhammas which, if viewed as events, must be viewed as events that are uni-phenomenal and uni-temporal. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39886 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 8:01am Subject: Dhamma Thread (184) Dear Dhamma Friends, We are discussing on functions of citta. Citta is not permanent. And it cannot stand alone but stands together with different cetasikas and these cetasikas give different names to citta. Because of co-arising cetasikas, there are 89 kinds of consciousness or 89 cittas. Functionwise there are only 14 kinds of citta. 1. patisandhi citta / linking-consciousness 2. bhavanga citta / life-continueing-consciousness 3. avajjana citta / adverting-consciousness 4. cakkhuvinnana citta/seeing-consciousness 5. sotavinnana citta / hearing-consciousness 6. ghanavinnana citta/ smelling-consciousness 7. jivhavinnana citta/ tasting-consciousness 8. kayavinnana citta / touching-consciousness 9. sampaticchana citta/receiving-consciousness 10.santirana citta / investigating-consciousness 11.votthapana citta / determining-consciousness 12.javana citta / impulsing-consciousness 13.tadarammana citta / retaining-consciousness 14.cuti citta /last-living-consciousness or dying-consciousness In the previous post, we have discussed on votthapana citta or determing consciousness. The 8th moment of life of object-rupa and sense-base-rupa has passed away. Now both rupas are approaching the 9th moment of their life. 1st was taken up by atita-bhavanga-citta or past life-continuum, 2nd was taken up by bhavanga-calana-citta or vibrating life-continuum, 3rd by bhavanguppaccheda-citta or arresting life-continuum, 4th by sense-door-adverting-consciousness or panca-dvara-avajjana citta, 5th by panca-vinnana citta or 5-sense-consciousness, 6th by sampaticchana or receiving-consciousness, 7th by santirana citta or investigating- consciousness, and 8th by votthapana citta or determining- consciousness. Votthapana citta or determining-consciousness passes away and next arise the 1st javana citta or the 1st impulsing-consciousness. Javana means 'swiftness' 'alacrity' 'quickness' 'fastness' 'rapidness' and this function of citta is the stage when a full perception of the object occurs. It is apperception of the whole object. As this kind of citta arises 7 times, it seems like very swiftly moving and sometimes some authors translate javana as 'running through'. But real function is apperception of the whole object. Atita-bhavanga-citta or past-lifecontinuum does not know the current object but knows its past object. So do the other two successive bhavanga cittas called bhavanga-calana-citta or vibrating lifecontinuum and bhavanguppaccheda citta or arresting life-continuum. The first citta in vithi vara that know the current object_which now becomes in its 4th moment of life_ is panca-dvara-avajjana-citta or 5- sense-door-adverting-consciousness. But its knowledge is just that there is an object. It has to pass to the next citta by adverting. So it is called adverting-consciousness. Next citta is panca-vinnana-citta or 5-sense-consciousness. As the name implies, this citta knows the sense that is the current sense and no other senses. This citta is unique in this function. Avajjana citta or adverting-consciousness does not know the sense. It just knows that there is an object. Again panca-dvara-avajjana-citta does not know the sense-object in full essence. It just knows the sense of their type. Next citta is sampaticchana citta or receiving-consciousness. This citta does not advert, does not know sense but it receives very well which has been sensed by sense-consciousness and it passes it to the next citta. Next citta is santirana citta or investigating-consciousness. This citta does not advert, does not know senses, and it is not a just a receiver. But as soon as it arises, it investigates the object and it has to pass away. Next citta is votthapana citta or determining-consciousness. This citta does not advert, does not know senses, but as the object is already investigated, this citta determining-consciousness has to decide or determine on how to perceive the whole object in its fullest essence. In performing these functions, the stated cittas do not create any kamma or potentials for arising of resultant effects. Because the 1st vithi citta is panca-dvara-avajjana-citta and it is a kiriya citta or functional consciousness or inoperational consciousness. As it just does the job of just knowing that there is an object, this is not a sin and not committing anything. The following 3 cittas are all vipaka cittas or resultant consciousness. They are panca-vinnana-citta or 5-sense-consciousness, sampaticchana citta or receiving-consciousness, and santirana citta or investigating-consciousness. Looking into these 3 cittas, there cannot be found any sins or any wholesome actions or unwholesome actions. So these 3 are also not creating any kamma. The 5th vithi citta ( 1st avajjana, 2nd panca-vinnana, 3rd sampaticchana, 4th santirana ) is votthappana citta. This function of votthapana kicca or determining function is done by manodvara- avajjana citta of 89 cittas. This citta is a kiriya citta. It just determines how to perceive the whole object. But it does not perceive the whole object in its fullest essence. As it just does its job, it is just a kiriya citta and it is not creating anything kamma. 8th moment of the life of both object-rupa and sense-base-rupa passes away along with votthapana citta or determining consciousness. Now both rupas are in their 9th moment of life. And next arises 1st javana citta or impulsing-consciousness. This citta apperceives the whole object in its fullest essence. As soon as this citta arises, there arises kamma at the same time if the arising javana citta is not kiriya citta. Votthapana citta does not apperceives the object. 1st javana citta apperceives the whole object. As it is the first of all javana cittas, it is the weakest of all javana cittas. Votthapana does not perceive. 2nd javana citta does perceive but as the object is aleardy sensed or perceived by the 1st javana citta, 2nd javana citta is stronger than 1st javana citta. 3rd javana citta is more stronger than 2nd javana citta. 4th javana citta is much more stronger than the 3rd javana citta. This is asevana paccaya or repetitive condition. But 7th javana citta is not like 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th javana citta in the strength. Because javana function has to stop and 7th javana citta becomes weaker as if growing old. But this 7th javana citta is stronger than the 1st javana citta. Because 1st javana citta is not preceeded by any javana citta who otherwise would have apperceived the whole object. And 7th javana citta is preceeded by 6 of javana cittas who already apperceived the whole object in its fullest essence. 9th moment was taken up by 1st javana citta, 10th moment by 2nd javana citta, 11th moment by 3rd javana citta, 12th moment by 4th javana citta, 13th moment by 5th javana citta, 14th moment by 6th javana citta, and 15th moment of life of object-rupa and sense-base- rup is taken up by 7yh javana citta. This 7th javana citta just lasts a moment and it passess away again. 15th moment of life passes away and now both rupa of object and rupa of sense-base are approaching 16th moment of their rupa-life. Next arising citta is called tadarammana citta or retaining-consciousness. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39887 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 8:29am Subject: Dhamma Thread (185) Dear Dhamma Friends, Now the arisen object which is a rupa becomes 16 moment old. So does the sense-base rupa. In citta niyama, there are 7 javana cittas and these cittas cannot arise more than 7. Both rupas have left 2 moments of life. The object is already apperceived by 7 javana cittas or impulsing- consciousness to its fullest essence. So the remaining 2 moments cannot taken by such kind of citta. In these 2 positions vipaka cittas arise. These vipaka cittas or resultant consciousness are not sense- consciousness or panca-vinnana cittas. These 2 cittas just retain the object. For retention, they do not produce any kamma as they are vipaka cittas or resultant consciousness and they just retain and not impulse. They do not involvement in any commitment. These 2 cittas are called tadarammana citta or retaining- consciousness. They can also be called as retention-consciousness. This function of citta, retention can be performed by 8 mahavipaka cittas and 3 santirana cittas. These 11 cittas ( 8 + 3 = 11 ) are called tadarammana cittas or retaining-consciousness. There are 4 upekkha mahavipaka cittas and 4 somanassa mahavipaka citta. There are 2 upekkha santirana cittas and 1 somanassa santirana citta. If the preceeding javana cittas are upekkha cittas then upekkha tadarammana cittas follow them. If the preceeding javana cittas are somanassa cittas then somanassa tadarammana cittas follow them. But if the preceeding javana cittas are domanassa cittas that is if they are dosa mulsa cittas, then upekkha tadarammana cittas have to follow these domanassa javana cittas. In this visayapavatti or in this vithi vara, there do arise tadarammana cittas. Because the object is the clearest object ever. As tadarammana cittas can arise in this vithi vara, there is no problem for both upekkha patisandhi and somanassa patisandhi puggalas or beings. Because there are upekkha tadarammana that can follow domanassa javana cittas. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing Explanation of golssary: Visaya means 'object'. Pavatti means 'arising'. Visayapavatti means 'arising of object'. There are 4 kinds of arising of object at pancadvara and 2 kinds of arising of object at manodvara. Vithi means 'serial'. Vara means 'turn'. Vithi vara means 'serial turn'. This takes the exact order. This turn is for this citta, that turn is for that citta, and so on. PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39888 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 8:54am Subject: Dhamma Thread (186) Dear Dhamma Friends, The 16th moment and the 17th moment of object rupa and sense-base rupa are taken up by 1st tadarammana citta and 2nd tadarammana citta. At the disappearence of 2nd tadarammana citta both rupas have to pass away as they both are old enough to live further moments. As there is no current object (rupa), next arising citta is bhavanga citta. Bhavanga citta has to arise because there are kamma still left and these kamma cause vipaka cittas to arise and then bhavanga cittas or life-continueing consciousness have to arise indefinitely as long as there is no further object to attend. In the previous post, we discussed on vithi vara or 'serial turn' and visayapavatti or 'arising of object'. What we described in the previous post is 'arising of a very clear object' and it is called 'ati-mahanta-arammana'. This visayapavatti takes 17 moments and the object works early. So there are maximum of vithi cittas in this vithi vara. In ati-mahanta-arammana vithi vara, there are 14 vithi cittas. 1. 1 panca-dvara-avajjana-citta 2. 1 panca-vinnana-citta 3. 1 sampaticchana-citta 4. 1 santirana-citta 5. 1 votthapana-citta 6. 7 javana-cittas 7. 2 tadarammana-cittas ----------------------- 14 vithi cittas altogether and there are 7 kinds of vithi citta. Please see number ( that is 1 to 7 ). If visayapavatti or 'arising of object' is not atimahantarammana or the arising object is not very clear as in atimahantarammana, there cannot arise any tadarammana cittas. So at the end of javana cittas, bhavanga cittas have to follow. Vithi vara will be discussed later. When javana cittas are domanassa javana cittas, and when there is no tadarammana citta, there arises a problem for beings with somanassa patisandhi. Because their bhavanga cittas will always be somanassa bhavanga cittas. Foregoing javana cittas are domanassa javana cittas. Domanassa cannot condition somanassa. This is the rule. So the problem does arise here. To solve this problem, there has to arise 'aagantuka bhavanga citta' or 'visiting life-continuum'. Foregoing cittas are domanassa javana cittas. As there is no tadarammana citta and no upekkha tadarammana citta is available, next arising citta has to be bhavanga citta. But bhavanga cittas of beings who are reborn with somanassa patisandhi are all somanassa. Aagantuka bhavanga citta or visiting life-continuum arises once just after 7th domanassa javana citta and just before original somanassa bhavanga cittas of the being. This new bhavanga citta is upekkha bhavanga citta. Upekkha bhavanga citta can follow domanassa javana citta. As this upekkha bhavana citta is not of somanassa bhavanga citta of being with somanassa patisandhi, it is called 'visiting bhavanga citta' or 'aagantuka bhavanga citta'. This is in line with 'anantara paccaya'. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39889 From: Tep Sastri Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 9:43am Subject: Re: The 37 factors as Fourth Noble Truth? Heresy or helpful? Hello, Phil - Thank you for welcoming me (at the bottom of your long message). Your thought about why the 37 bodhipakkhiya dhamma (as a group) does not inspire you as the 4 Noble Truths (one member of the group) does, is interesting. But isn't the Noble Eightfold Path a member (or subset) of the Four Noble Truths? And, curiously enough, why does this subset fail to inspire you? So it seems your inspiration does not depend on the scale factor (i.e. a subset is easier to inspire than the whole). Then, what does your inspiration depend on? For me my inspiration is strongest when I see a huge benefit within my capability, i.e. Sotapatti (stream entry) rather than Arahat. It follows that the 4 Noble Truths inspires me more than the bodhipakkhiya dhamma. And I don't have any problem embracing the Noble Eightfold Path. You asked, "Why does the Buddha define his teaching in these terms to the monks in this sutta, and why doesn't he do so in his exposition of The Four Noble Truths?" I guess it was because the Great Sage aimed high for his students (like all great teachers); he always encouraged his noble disciples not to be contented easily and stopped before reaching the final goal: the Arahat. Kind regards, Tep ========= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "plnao" wrote: > > Hello all > > These days I'm thinking about something I was discussing with James. > Why is it that > my "mind doesn't leap up" when it comes to The Noble Eightfold Path? These > days I'm > wondering if the 37 factors (I forget the Pali) which includes the Noble > Eightfold Path doesn't > inspire me more directly as a Fourth Noble Truth. The 4 Right Efforts, for > example (included in > the 37 factors) make my mind leap up and lead to practice here and now in a > way that the Noble Eightfold Path > doesn't, for some reason. > > Anyways, that's what I'm thinking about today. > > A passage from SN XXII81: > > Then Ven. Ananda went with those monks to where the Blessed One was staying > in Parileyyaka, at the root of the Auspicious Sal Tree, and on arrival, > after bowing down to him, sat to one side. As they were sitting there, the > Blessed One instructed, urged, roused, & encouraged them with a talk on > Dhamma. > Now, on that occasion this train of thought appeared in the awareness of one > of the monks: "Now I wonder -- knowing in what way, seeing in what way, does > one without delay put an end to the effluents?" > > The Blessed One, perceiving with his awareness the train of thought in the > monk's awareness, said to the monks, "I have analyzed & taught you the > Dhamma, monks. I have analyzed & taught you the four frames of reference, > the four right exertions, the four bases of power, the five faculties, the > five strengths, the seven factors for Awakening, & the noble eightfold path. > And yet, even though I have analyzed & taught you the Dhamma, still there > appears this train of thought in the awareness of one of the monks: 'Now I > wonder -- knowing in what way, seeing in what way, does one without delay > put an end to the effluents?' > > (BTW, that final question is a nice one to leave hanging for you! :) ) > > I note that the Buddha defines his teaching in terms of these 37 factors > rather than the Eightfold Noble Path alone. > > I am feeling that while the Eightfold Path points at our destination, these > 37 factors point at a practice that can be developed (patiently, of course, > without > > hunger for results) in order > > to move towards that destination. > > I wonder if anyone else has ever wondered about this. Why does the Buddha > defines his teaching in these terms to the monks in this sutta, and why > > doesn't he do so in his exposition of The Four Noble Truths. If a person > were to take these 37 factors as his or her Fourth Noble Truth rather than > The Eightfold Noble Path alone, what would the dangers or benefits be? To > me, these 37 factors feel much more inspiring and "mind-leaps up"- ing than > the Eightfold Noble Path alone. > > BTW, it seems that Naomi has decided that it is time to tackle the > problem we've been > > having with our computer, so she is disabling all our programs. I don't know > the details, > but we'll be off e-mail while we do this, and... > > ...anyways, I will be away for a while, or so it seems. Or perhaps the > problem with be fixed tout de suite. > > In case it takes longer, wishing you all well, and welcome to our new member > Tep. > > Metta, > > Phil > 39890 From: Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 4:58am Subject: Re: Suravira: Problems in My Understanding: Sarah In a message dated 12/17/2004 12:43:39 AM Pacific Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@y... writes: 3.You say that 'as we refine perception (panna) through the bodhisattva discipline of meditation, our awareness of the nature of paramattha dhammas, as they arise and fall away, becomes enhanced.' I'd just like to stress that the Buddha did not encourage us to 'refine.....through the bodhisattva.......'. He taught us to develop understanding and awareness of the paramattha dhammas directly when they appear. 4. You refer to abiding inside and outside a state of insight with a different mode of consciousness and false views abating for a moment at stream entry. At stream entry, as you know well, false views are eradicated for good. So, yes, a sotapanna uses a 'conventional perspective of truth' but no wrong views associated with them. Hi Sarah I had problems with some of this. Starting with # 4... Are you saying that Stream Entry eliminates false views permanently ("for good") ? That's what it sounds like. Only the "grossest" types of false views are eradicated by the Stream Entrant: False-belief in Self, skeptical doubt, and attachment to rules and ritual. # 3. Your partial quote of Suravira's remarks kind of skewed them to mean something less than what was really being said. Nevertheless, I agree with your criticism that the Buddha did indeed not teach in those words. It is only Suravira's interpretation that leads him or her to use such words. However, you proceed and do the exact same thing that you criticise Suravira for doing. You claim that: -- "He taught us to develop understanding and awareness of the paramattha dhammas directly when they appear." No he did not teach that. That is your interpretation. The Buddha never said (according to any record I know of) that -- "I want you to develop awareness and understanding of paramattha dhammas directly when they appear." If he had said that, I'd be agreeing with you 100%. Since he didn't say that, I'm not agreeing with you 100%. After the painstaking manner in which the dhamma was preserved and recorded by the Bhikkhus, and who ever else had a hand in preserving them...let's please not go putting words into the Buddha's mouth that he did not state. It is fine that you believe the intent of the Buddha was to teach us to: develop understanding and awareness of the paramattha dhammas directly when they appear. That's fine if that's what you believe. But it should be stated in that manner...i.e., that: -- "I believe" the intent of the Buddha was to....etc., etc. That way the truth is "preserved." Because when you say that the Buddha taught us to "develop awareness of paramattha dhammas" etc. That's, not a true statement. It may or may not be a fact, but its not a true statement. Since the Buddha didn't even use the term "paramattha dhamma" (to my knowledge), it is only your belief that was his intent or the way he wanted Dhamma understood. My feeing is that what the Buddha said, he said for a reason, and what he didn't say, he didn't say for a reason. The Buddha could have easily catagorized the Dhamma into paramattha dhammas if that was his intent. In my view, it was much harder to not catagorze the dhamma in that manner. And since he didn't didn't catagorize dhamma in that manner, it raises a "red flag" when people not only state that he meant to do it that way, but actually put the words into his mouth as "doing it that way." The Buddha did teach about elements, he did teach about aggregates, and to say he did would be fine. But he did not teach about paramattha dhammas. The latter is an interpretive view. Just as Suravira's remark about Bodhisattva meditation made you obviously uncomfortable because it was something you knew the Buddha didn't say...so too, when I hear people say that the Buddha taught paramattha dhammas I think a lot of knowledgable Buddhist investigators would feel equally uncomfortable and see it in exactly the same way as the Bodhisattva meditation remark. I'd be interested in your comments because I think both you and I and everyone in this group are interested in the truth and the most effective way to go about eliminating suffering. Different methods work better for different people and that's fine (even though I know mine is the best.) ;-) But it would lend credence to those who like the paramattha dhamma idea to understand, that teaching in that manner is at the stage of commentarial interpretation, and not the actual teaching of the Buddha. It would be wonderful if it would be treated as such. That doesn't make it less right or wrong, but it does "preserve the truth." (Nice Sutta on Preserving the truth in Majjhima Nikaya.) :-) TG 39891 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 11:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread (186)Htoo. Dear Htoo, You explained it very clearly. it is in the Expositor, and I always found it difficult. In English also the word adventitious bhavanga is used. Nina. op 17-12-2004 17:54 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > Aagantuka bhavanga citta or visiting life-continuum arises once just > after 7th domanassa javana citta and just before original somanassa > bhavanga cittas of the being. This new bhavanga citta is upekkha > bhavanga citta. Upekkha bhavanga citta can follow domanassa javana > citta. As this upekkha bhavana citta is not of somanassa bhavanga > citta of being with somanassa patisandhi, it is called 'visiting > bhavanga citta' or 'aagantuka bhavanga citta'. 39892 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 11:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread (185), Htoo. Dear Htoo, thank you. I have been reflecting when the Vis. study came to this. When a very great object (atimahanta) experienced during the viithi is unpleasant, there are akusala vipaakacittas before the javanas, such as seeing, etc. and the javanas are either kusala cittas or akusala cittas. After that the vipaakacittas which are tadaaramma.nacittas arise, these are also vipaakacittas. But, since they are mostly produced by the same kamma that produced rebirth, they can, in the case of a human, not be akusala vipaakacittas. Is this right, and do you have a way to check? I also understand that mostly, but not always the tadaaramma.nacittas are produced by the same kamma that produced rebirth. Is this right? I have been reading about the subject in the Co. to the Abhidhamattha Sangaha. Nina. op 17-12-2004 17:29 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > In this visayapavatti or in this vithi vara, there do arise > tadarammana cittas. Because the object is the clearest object ever. > As tadarammana cittas can arise in this vithi vara, there is no > problem for both upekkha patisandhi and somanassa patisandhi puggalas > or beings. Because there are upekkha tadarammana that can follow > domanassa javana cittas. 39893 From: Suravira Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 11:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] Contact/TG - /Suravira -> khantikhema Dear Khanitkhema, I appologize for not responding sooner but other responsibilities have had my attention. > 2. Only one phenomena can occur at a time. [Suravira] We can be conscious of one dhamma at a given moment. > ... The only thing that goes from one life into the next in Buddhism in "kamma". this is different than individuality. [Suravira] Yes atta does not go from one life into the next, i.e., reincarnation is not the Dhamma. > > 4. If the consciousness you are speaking of a mind consciousness of voidness, then the voidness is, in and of itself, an object here. [Suravira] I am not speaking nama-vinanna of shunyatta, i.e, shunyatta as the object of nama-vinanna. Let me try to express it in this way: Because visual-consciousness is shunyatta, shapes and forms are seen. Because auditory-consciousness is shunyatta, sounds are heard. Because olfactory-consciousness is shunyatta, scents are smelled. Because gustatory-consciousness is shunyatta, flavors are tasted. Because tactile-consciousness is shunyatta, sensations are felt. Because nama-vinanna is shunyatta, myriad dhammas are perceived. > 5. Consider the Buddhist doctrine of rebirth. According to that > doctrine, continuity of consciousness occurs between the death of > one body (one bag of rupa) and the conception in another body > (another bag of rupa). In that no two bags of rupa can occupy the > same point in space at the same point in time, then how is rebirth > occuring? > > Could you please tell me where this doctrine appears within the suttas or the vinaya? [Suravira] That there is continuity of nama between rebirth is Dhamma. The question possed is to engage our critical intellect in order to explore the process of rebirth. What is it that is said to have continuity between lives, and how does it move through space/time? With metta, Suravira 39894 From: Tep Sastri Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 0:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread (186)Htoo. Dear Mrs. Gorkom and Htoo, Although I have been impressed by the many concepts and complexities of the Abhidhamma, I can't help wondering about practical values of the knowledge about the various kinds of citta; e.g.the 7th domanassa javana citta, aagantuka bhavanga citta, and so on. How may we verify that these cittas really exist, not just only in the book? Further, can such detailed information about citta help a vipassana meditator to make better progress than other meditators who don't have the knowledge? Warm regards, Tep ======== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Htoo, > You explained it very clearly. it is in the Expositor, and I always found it > difficult. In English also the word adventitious bhavanga is used. > Nina. > op 17-12-2004 17:54 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > > > Aagantuka bhavanga citta or visiting life-continuum arises once just > > after 7th domanassa javana citta and just before original somanassa > > bhavanga cittas of the being. This new bhavanga citta is upekkha > > bhavanga citta. Upekkha bhavanga citta can follow domanassa javana > > citta. As this upekkha bhavana citta is not of somanassa bhavanga > > citta of being with somanassa patisandhi, it is called 'visiting > > bhavanga citta' or 'aagantuka bhavanga citta'. 39895 From: Suravira Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 0:38pm Subject: Problems in My Understanding Re: [dsg] Contact/TG) -> Sarah Dear Sarah, I apologize for not responding sooner but other responsibilities had my attention. > clear on your meaning. You were referring in part to a book of Sujin's > translated by Nina, maybe 'Survey of Paramattha Dhammas'?? (Pls post any [Suravira] Yes, that is one of the articles. > 1. You mention that in some translations, 'absolute reality' is 'promoted > as 'the truth' '. Absolute reality (paramattha dhamma) refers to what > truly arises and falls at this very moment as we speak. The words are not > important, but seeing, hearing, like, dislike, feeling and so on are all > examples. > > 2. You say 'conventional reality' is 'addressed as if it were debased > relative to 'absolute reality' '. A cup, a person, a tree are conventional > realities. I have no idea about them being 'debased' but they are not > 'absolute realities' that can be directly experienced. > > 3.You say that 'as we refine perception (panna) through the bodhisattva > discipline of meditation, our awareness of the nature of paramattha > dhammas, as they arise and fall away, becomes enhanced.' I'd just like to > stress that the Buddha did not encourage us to 'refine.....through the > bodhisattva.......'. He taught us to develop understanding and awareness > of the paramattha dhammas directly when they appear. [Suravira] If we look at the discipline of the practice of bodhisattva paramittas, for example the practice of kshanti (non- violence and forbearance; stoic endurance of hardship) cultivates mindfulness and insight into the powers karma and mental afflictions (e.g., greed, anger and ingnorance) relative to the circumstances of daily life as well as adversities that arise. Through the cultivation of kshanti mental afflictions are illuminated - we see their nature and those insights develops prajna (transcendent wisdom). > > 4. You refer to abiding inside and outside a state of insight with a > different mode of consciousness and false views abating for a moment at > stream entry. At stream entry, as you know well, false views are > eradicated for good. So, yes, a sotapanna uses a 'conventional perspective > of truth' but no wrong views associated with them. [Suravira] Stream entry is an incomplete enlightenment, it is not a terminus as ignorance is deeply rooted and persistent. As such all false views are not eradicated for good at that moment (however, the false views of individuality, doubt in the Dhamma and confidence in rituals are eradicated). For example, the false views related to anger is not eradicated until arhatship. A person becomes an aryan at stream entry, but not all aryans are arhats. It is imperative that the aryan continue to 'enter the stream' over and over again in order to develop the capacity of liberate themselves from the powers of unwholesome kamma and mental afflictions - even into the layer of latent tendencies. As the Buddha taught in the Dhammapada verse 398: 'Just as a tree, though cut down sprouts up again if its roots remain uncut and firm, even so, until the craving that lies dormant is rooted out, suffering springs up again and again.' > > 5.You continue to talk about the subject-object duality and I get rather > lost. [Suravira] Can you pin-point the location in the message where my presentation is not cogent? I will attempt to clarify the message. > I'd just like to stress that the realities, the paramattha dhammas > of life, are the same regardless of whether there is any understanding of > them or not. [Suravira] Yes, the nature of paramattha dhammas is not dependent upon valid cognition. > Seeing or hearing are seeing and hearing whether or not there > is ever any awareness of knowing about them or not. [Suravira] I imagine you are, by analogy, stating that the tree falls in the woods even when there is no one there to hear or see that tree fall? > > 6. You say 'the conventional and absolute are NOT separate'. Again, I'm > missing your point. [Suravira] This point I attempted to make is that the absolute and the conventional are not antithetical. > Hearing, sound and ideas of a sound are all quite > different and separate. The various ideas we have, the concepts about a > sound, cover up the true realities. > > 7. You say it is 'within the conventional perspective that we undertake > the refinement of perception so that we are capable of realizing the > nature of paramattha dhammas'. [Suravira] The conventional perspective is the context in which we begin the process of cultivating the bodhisattva paramitta, e.g., generosity, virtue, kshanti, the 4 brahmaviharas, meditation and prajna. > This makes it sound as if realities can be > known by thinking and by a self or 'we' doing something. [Suravira] I think I have misunderstood your point here as it appears to me that you are promoting nihilism - not the middle way. > Paramattha > dhammas can only ever be known or realized by directly understanding their > characteristics when they appear, now. [Suravira] The absolute is imponderable and incalculable by discriminating perception (sanna). > > 8.You go on to say that as unenlightened people, 'our perspective, > intention and understanding are not rooted in this truth -nirvana'. > However, when we're talking here about paramattha dhammas and the > development of understanding, we're not talking about nibbana/nirvana. [Suravira] Nibbana is one of the four paramattha dhammas (the other three being citta, cetaseka and rupa). Refer to Sujin's large book translated by Nina. > I > think you are introducing Mahayana ideas into what you read in A.Sujin's > books etc. Nibbana (the unconditioned reality) is eventually realized > according to the Buddha's teaching by understanding conditioned realities > for what they are. [Suravira] Conditioned dhamma are comprehensible and it is imperative that we understand that which is being negated - the nature of which is anatta, is shunyatta. Nibbana is imponderable to the discriminating perception. Only at stream entry is one provided a glimpse of the nature of nibbana. > This is why there are 4 Noble Truths. > [Suravira] I am sorry but I am unable to grasp the reason(s) implicit within this point. I am imagining that you are pointing to the truth of cessation, which is naturally present due to anatta and shunyatta. > 9. Again you say that 'our daily life forms upon the paramattha dhammas - > forms upon nirvana'. The Buddha doesn't say that seeing or hearing 'form > upon nirvana'. We cannot say this. Again, it's a Mahayana idea not found > in the Tipitaka as I understand it. To be honest, it doesn't make any > sense to me regardless of the source. [Suravira] Nama-vinanna experience the 'meaning' of the paramattha dhamma - this meaning is a concept, a thought (pannattis dhamma). > > 10. Finally, and the main point in what you wrote I think, you say that > you object to the word 'reality' instead of 'perspective' which doesn't > carry the same 'existential baggage'. > > It's true that no words are ideal. However, if we again use the examples > of seeing, hearing, sound, like, dislike and so on, 'perspective' would > suggest some idea or orientation. Seeing or hearing are 'real' and > directly knowable at this very moment. They can be tested out and proven > whereas a perspective will depend on our ideas only. [Suravira] It is sanna that supports perspective. As sanna is present with every citta, then perspective is always present in each conscious moment of consciousness. > We can just use > 'dhamma' as others have suggested, but make it clear that it has nothing > in this context to do with perspective or conventional/conceptual ideas. > [Suravira] This is so, only as long as it is understood that nibbana is imponderable to the discriminating perception. Thank you for your considered questions. It is always a pleasure to discuss the Dhamma with you. With metta, Suravira 39896 From: agriosinski Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 1:06pm Subject: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: [...] > …. > S: Yes, no problem. When there is lobha (as root condition), it has the > power or force to bring about/condition various dhammas. No self or thing > or essence involved. Sarah, plaese expalain how can we have lobha without self being involved. By "thing or essence" you mean dhammas or something else? metta, Agrios 39897 From: guyjz Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 0:21pm Subject: Visuddhimagga online? Dear friends, Is there an online or downloadable version of the Vis. anywhere? (i.e. one that I can use a search function with) Metta, Guy 39898 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 2:47pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 77 - Volition/cetanaa (g) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.4 Volition(cetanaa]contd] ***** When we are lying or slandering the degree of akusala is more coarse and at such moments akusala cetanå motivates akusala kamma patha (course of action) through speech. The akusala cetanå directs the other dhammas it accompanies so that they perform their own tasks and it ‘wills’ akusala. Moreover, it is able to produce the appropriate result of the bad deed later on, since the unwholesome volition or kamma is accumulated. Each citta which arises falls away but it conditions the succeeding citta. Since our life is an uninterrupted series of cittas which succeed one another, unwholesome and wholesome volitions or kammas are accumulated from moment to moment and can therefore produce results later on. There are ten kinds of akusala kamma patha, courses of action, which are performed through body, speech or mind (1). They are: killing, stealing, sexual misbehaviour, lying, slandering, rude speech, frivolous talk, covetousness, ill-will and wrong view. The akusala cetanå (or akusala kamma) which motivates such a deed is capable of producing akusala vipåka in the form of rebirth in an unhappy plane of existence or it can produce akusala vipåka which arises in the course of one’s life, vipåkacittas which experience unpleasant objects through the senses. *** 1) Abhidhamma in Daily Life Chapter 5 ***** [Ch.4 Volition(cetanaa) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 39899 From: Philip Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 4:29pm Subject: Re: The 37 factors as Fourth Noble Truth? Heresy or helpful? Hello Tep, and all > Thank you for welcoming me (at the bottom of your long message). Welcome again. > Your thought about why the 37 bodhipakkhiya dhamma (as a group) > does not inspire you as the 4 Noble Truths (one member of the group) > does, is interesting. Interesting and embarassing in this case! >But isn't the Noble Eightfold Path a member (or > subset) of the Four Noble Truths? And, curiously enough, why does this > subset fail to inspire you? So it seems your inspiration does not > depend on the scale factor (i.e. a subset is easier to inspire than the > whole). Then, what does your inspiration depend on? I think my problem is/was that I am too hungry for results. I've just received two Sutta anthologies (SN and MN) and as I predicted, they've thrown me into a bit of a sutta reading frenzy, which resulted in the basically pretty silly (though you were kind enough to respond to it) question. I am so keen on the 4 right efforts these days that it didn't even occur to me that they are Right Effort! Still, at least I have outgrown the kind of thinking that says that by knowing what Right Speech is, for example, we can decide to have it. There are so many conditions at work, and it takes so much time. > For me my inspiration is strongest when I see a huge benefit within my > capability, i.e. Sotapatti (stream entry) rather than Arahat. Yes. For me, it is to become an instructed worldling rather than an uninstructed one, in this lifetime. I am not confident about my capability to shed wrong view of self in this lifetime - which I believe is the first requirement for stream entry, but my way is to start with humble aspirations and practice in that way, and we will see what unfolds from there. > It follows that the 4 Noble Truths inspires me more than the bodhipakkhiya dhamma. Oh yes, definitely. I'm always absorbed in the First Three Truths these days, but for some reason hadn't been grabbed by the Fourth Truth of the Path, hungering as I was in an impatient way for a more readily applicable way, and the bodhipakkhiya looked more directly applicable. > And I don't have any problem embracing the Noble Eightfold Path. Yes, you're right, of course. I was in a sutta devouring frenzy when I posted that question. You will see me doing that quite often, alas. Thank you in advance for your help! Thanks also to James for having me started to think more about what the Noble Eightfold Path means to me and for having encouraged me to place more importance on it. > You asked, "Why does the Buddha define his teaching in these terms > to the monks in this sutta, and why doesn't he do so in his exposition of > The Four Noble Truths?" I guess it was because the Great Sage aimed high for his students (like > all great teachers); he always encouraged his noble disciples not to be > contented easily and stopped before reaching the final goal: the > Arahat. Also, as you said, they were monks, not beginners like myself. I can still benefit from knowing about the bodhipakkhiya but first things first. Thanks again. Metta, Phil P.s Sarah, and all. The computer is fixed. I'm now back at the website rather than receiving e-mail. Nice to be able to get back into the useful posts. I want to read about the satipatthana sutta and how satipatthana is practiced here and now. 39900 From: kenhowardau Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 4:46pm Subject: Re: Suravira: Problems in My Understanding: Sarah Hi TG, I'll get a quick word in while we are waiting for Sarah's reply. You wrote: -------------- > I had problems with some of this. Starting with # 4... Are you saying that Stream Entry eliminates false views permanently ("for good") ? That's what it sounds like. Only the "grossest" types of false views are eradicated by the Stream Entrant: False-belief in Self, skeptical doubt, and attachment to rules and ritual. > ----------------------- I don't think you are using "false views" (micchi-ditthi) in the way it is used in the Tipitaka. Which false views do you have in mind when you say they are not eradicated at Stream-entry? ----------------- TG: > # 3. Your partial quote of Suravira's remarks kind of skewed them to mean something less than what was really being said. Nevertheless, I agree with your criticism that the Buddha did indeed not teach in those words. It is only Suravira's interpretation that leads him or her to use such words. However, you proceed and do the exact same thing that you criticise Suravira for doing. You claim that: -- "He taught us to develop understanding and awareness of the paramattha dhammas directly when they appear." No he did not teach that. That is your interpretation. The Buddha never said (according to any record I know of) that -- "I want you to develop awareness and understanding of paramattha dhammas directly when they appear." If he had said that, I'd be agreeing with you 100%. Since he didn't say that, I'm not agreeing with you 100%. After the painstaking manner in which the dhamma was preserved and recorded by the Bhikkhus, and who ever else had a hand in preserving them...let's please not go putting words into the Buddha's mouth that he did not state. > --------------------- Is it Sarah or the Ancient Commentators who are, in your opinion, putting words into the Buddha's mouth? I think you will find Sarah's views are in accordance with the Ancient Commentaries, and their views, in turn, are in accordance with the Tipitaka. Modern Buddhism has become a terrible mishmash of misinterpretations, many of them involving outright charlatanism. Anyone can set himself up as a guru or a meditation master and have loyal followers. He needs only to give an occasional sutta reference - real or imaginary - and begin his utterances with "the Buddha said." The teacher who gives the most pleasing interpretation gets the most followers. A tiny minority of Buddhists (notably K Sujin and her students) are leading a resurgence of the ancient commentaries. Those Ancient Commentaries add nothing new to the Dhamma, but they do put the kybosh on the self-styled gurus and charlatan 'meditation masters.' -------------------------------- TG: > It is fine that you believe the intent of the Buddha was to teach us to: develop understanding and awareness of the paramattha dhammas directly when they appear. That's fine if that's what you believe. But it should be stated in that manner...i.e., that: -- "I believe" the intent of the Buddha was to....etc., etc. That way the truth is "preserved." Because when you say that the Buddha taught us to "develop awareness of paramattha dhammas" etc. That's, not a true statement. It may or may not be a fact, but its not a true statement. Since the Buddha didn't even use the term "paramattha dhamma" (to my knowledge), it is only your belief that was his intent or the way he wanted Dhamma understood. > -------------------------------- It *is* a true statement! How many references and explanations do you want? The DSG archives are chock-a-block with them! ----------- TG: > My feeing is that what the Buddha said, he said for a reason, and what he didn't say, he didn't say for a reason. The Buddha could have easily catagorized the Dhamma into paramattha dhammas if that was his intent. > ------------ He constantly categorised the Dhamma into the five khandhas and the elements etc. Later, someone gave those dhammas the name "paramattha" to distinguish them from pannatti. They didn't need to do this, and, if you like, you can use the words, 'dhammas' 'khandhas' 'nama and rupa' 'dathus' and so on. ---------------------------- TG: > In my view, it was much harder to not catagorze the dhamma in that manner. And since he didn't didn't catagorize dhamma in that manner, it raises a "red flag" when people not only state that he meant to do it that way, but actually put the words into his mouth as "doing it that way." The Buddha did teach about elements, he did teach about aggregates, and to say he did would be fine. But he did not teach about paramattha dhammas. The latter is an interpretive view. > ---------------- There is no difference between paramattha dhammas and elements (or khandhas). If you are so adamant that there is a difference, you should state what that difference is. --------------------- TG: > Just as Suravira's remark about Bodhisattva meditation made you obviously uncomfortable because it was something you knew the Buddha didn't say...so too, when I hear people say that the Buddha taught paramattha dhammas I think a lot of knowledgable Buddhist investigators would feel equally uncomfortable and see it in exactly the same way as the Bodhisattva meditation remark. > --------------------- Are these "knowledgeable Buddhist investigators" superior to Buddhagosa and his predecessors? Why are they so keen to discredit them? Do they have a vested interest in maintaining the guru industry? (There is a lot of power, status and money involved.) ------------ TG: > I'd be interested in your comments because I think both you and I and everyone in this group are interested in the truth and the most effective way to go about eliminating suffering. Different methods work better for different people and that's fine (even though I know mine is the best.) ;-) ------------ Before you rush into one of these so-called 'different methods' (none of which are in the Tipitaka) why don't you see what the Tipitaka is saying? When there is confusion over the meaning of any section, why not be guided by the official Theravada commentaries? Why do you prefer the opinions of yourself and other modern-day authorities? ------------------------------------ TG: > But it would lend credence to those who like the paramattha dhamma idea to understand, that teaching in that manner is at the stage of commentarial interpretation, and not the actual teaching of the Buddha. It would be wonderful if it would be treated as such. That doesn't make it less right or wrong, but it does "preserve the truth." (Nice Sutta on Preserving the truth in Majjhima Nikaya.) :-) ----------------------------------- Who says it is not the actual teaching of the Buddha? I must be missing the point: surely you wouldn't be saying these things if it was just about terminology - the use of the word 'paramattha' to refer to nama and rupa. Please explain! Ken H 39901 From: Philip Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 4:49pm Subject: Re: $BA$(Betasikas' study corner 77 - Volition/cetanaa (g) Hello all > The akusala cetan$B!&(B(or akusala kamma) which motivates such a deed > is capable of producing akusala vip$BiL(Ba in the form of rebirth in > an unhappy plane of existence or it can produce akusala vip$BiL(Ba > which arises in the course of one$BCT(B life, vip$BiL(Bacittas which > experience unpleasant objects through the senses. Also, it leads to accumulation. So the unwholesome deed is more likely to arise again, not necessarily as a result of kamma, but because of latent accumulations, which is not the same thing as vipaka. Is that right? A question - does it depend on the gravity of the deed whether the vipakacitta arises in this lifetime or with the rebirth citta, or is that one of the imponderables? Thanks in advance for you help with these two questions. Metta Phil 39902 From: Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 4:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga online? Hi Guy, No, there is no on-line version of Visuddhimagga but you can buy it here: http://www.pariyatti.com/frontpage.cgi Look for it under "Path of Purification" if you want the translation. Larry 39903 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 6:55pm Subject: Re: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi James (and Phil) --- buddhatrue wrote: > > > Hi Phil, > > Phil: just like the time you asked Jon if he was sure > he wasn't in the service of Mara! (I'm afraid I've never been able to > see him quite the same way since....) ;-)) > James: LOL! I don't think I asked if he was in the `service' of > Mara; that makes him sound like a devil worshipper or something! ;-) > I believe I asked him if he was being unduly influenced by Mara (or > something to that effect)- because of his rather dogmatic insistence > that the Mindfulness of Breathing Sutta wasn't really about > mindfulness of breathing (it seems to be just too obvious to me to > be a difference of opinion). Hmmmm. Have I ever said that? Must've been under the influence of more than just Mara. But anyway, we are all influenced by > Mara so you really shouldn't see Jon any differently because of my > question. I am influenced by Mara, you are influenced by Mara, even > Kh. Sujin is influenced by Mara! We are all dancing with the > devil! ;-)) The Buddha taught that the only way for the > unenlightened to escape the influence of Mara, when Mara cannot read > the mind and cause havoc, is during jhana. There's another good > reason to cultivate Jhana! ;-) Hmmm again. Cultivating jhana is easier said than done. How about instead having the ideal of cultivating any form of kusala (i.e., dana, sila, samatha or vipassana)? Jon 39904 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 7:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same', TG, Suan. Hi, Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, Nina (and TG) - > If I may add a personal observation: I don't think that all namas > must take an object. Nibbana is an instance of a nama that does not... We've heard you claim to have experienced jhana, but I think this is the first time we've heard you claim to have personally experienced nibbana ;-)) (Sorry, couldn't resist that one.) Jon 39905 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 7:18pm Subject: Re: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi, Herman --- Egbert wrote: ... > This seems like an appropriate spot to make the following point, > which has been stewing for a few years (perhaps a bit overcooked by > now :-)) > > Seeing is the knowing of visible object, hearing the knowing of > sound etc. This is immediate, unmediated, non-reflexive. > > Knowing seeing, or knowing hearing etc is not-immediate, it is > mediated, it is reflexive, it is the knowing of a knowing, it is > consciousness of a consciousness. I'm not sure if by 'knowing seeing' here you mean (a) awareness of seeing, which I would regard as direct and immediate (or, in your terms, unmediated), or (b) thinking about (i.e. 'processing') the moments of seeing, which I understand to be non-direct 'analysis' of those moments. > Visible object, sound etc is its own knowing. When it is said that > cittas are so fast and short-lived, this is said relative to another > level, namely the knowing of seeing or the knowing of hearing. ... > From the ability of people to drive through a maze of fast-moving > objects, whilst being reflexively aware of only their next post to > dsg, it is clear that there is a level of knowing which operates > very effectively without needing to be known again by itself. But there are limits and, from recent reports, apparently enforcement of the 'off-side' rule in soccer requires an ability beyond that limit! > What are visible object and sound other than visible object and > sound? Are they something lesser than what they are before they are > known as having been seen or heard? > > This is not a metaphysical question. But there is room to doubt the > validity of any suggestion that sound becomes sound by virtue of > being heard (reflexively in a secondary consciousness) or likewise > that visible object becomes so by virtue of being seen. According to my understanding of the texts, the opposite is suggested, namely, that sound must have arisen already for it to become the object of hearing consciousness. > The need for liberation is the need to be liberated from the > clutching at reflexive knowing of what has already been and gone and > been duly known by itself. An interesting spin on the purpose and goal of the teachings. I'll have to think about that... Jon PS Apologies for not having replied to your earlier post. Will do so this weekend. 39906 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 7:28pm Subject: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Friend Jon, Jon: Hmmmm. Have I ever said that? Must've been under the influence of more than just Mara. James: I'm pretty sure you did. If I remember correctly, your argument was that breathing isn't an ultimate reality and therefore can't be directly experienced; therefore the Mindfulness of Breathing Sutta isn't really about mindfulness of breathing. Sound familiar? However, if you have changed your mind and now believe that the Mindfulness of Breathing Sutta is about mindfulness of breathing, then great! You must have defeated Mara! ;-)) Jon: Hmmm again. Cultivating jhana is easier said than done. How about instead having the ideal of cultivating any form of kusala (i.e., dana, sila, samatha or vipassana)? James: I wonder if anyone ever said to the Buddha, "Hey, what you're teaching is easier said than done!"? ;-) I stress the development of jhana because it is a factor of the Noble Eightfold Path: jhana is Right Concentration. Additionally, practicing Jhana doesn't preclude practing dana, sila, samatha (do you mean mundane samatha, since jhana is samatha?) and vipassana also. It doesn't have to be either or. Metta, James 39907 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 7:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread (186)Htoo. Hi, Tep A good question. I look forward to the discussion on this point. My own view is that there is much in the teachings that is needed for background information but that is not necessarily to be directly known and realised for oneself. But I look forward to responses from the Nina and Htoo (and others). Jon PS Welcome back to the list from me, too. --- Tep Sastri wrote: > > > Dear Mrs. Gorkom and Htoo, > > Although I have been impressed by the many concepts and > complexities of the Abhidhamma, I can't help wondering about > practical values of the knowledge about the various kinds of citta; > e.g.the 7th domanassa javana citta, aagantuka bhavanga citta, and so > on. How may we verify that these cittas really exist, not just only in > the > book? Further, can such detailed information about citta help a > vipassana meditator to make better progress than other meditators > who don't have the knowledge? > > > Warm regards, > > > Tep 39908 From: Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 3:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same', TG, Suan. Hi, Jon - In a message dated 12/17/04 10:02:13 PM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > Hi, Howard > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > > >Hi, Nina (and TG) - > > If I may add a personal observation: I don't think that all namas > >must take an object. Nibbana is an instance of a nama that does not... > > We've heard you claim to have experienced jhana, but I think this is the > first time we've heard you claim to have personally experienced nibbana > ;-)) --------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, no, it's not that, Jon. I think it's just that I've been on DSG for so long, I've picked up the habit of talking authoritively of things I've only read about! ;-)) --------------------------------------------- > > (Sorry, couldn't resist that one.) > --------------------------------------------- Howard: Happens to the best of us!! ;-)) ---------------------------------------------- > > Jon > ====================== With directly experienced metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39909 From: Sukinder Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 9:23pm Subject: [dsg] Is there seeing now? Re: kusala and akusala. Hi Azita, Howard, Alan, > Azita: If the jhanas were part of 'my' accumulations, then I would > probably be 'doing' Jhana, or rather jhanacittas would be arising and > falling away now. THat doesn't appear to be the case, so I'm content > to develop the awareness and understanding of this very moment, > seeing, hearing, flavour, hardness, pain etc. ====================== Sukin: I am not sure what the influence would be had someone developed jhanas in previous lives to such proficiency that he could readily replicate any 'learnt' meditation object in his mind. Could there be conditions in this life whereby such an image would arise and cause him to experience moments of jhana? I don't know. However, don't you think that generally jhana is not a matter simply of concentrating on an object and being able to subsequently reproduce a similar object in the mind? Does not jhana involve panna of a very high level, though this is not the same as vipassana panna? Were jhana cittas to arise and fall as part of your experience wouldn't this imply the level of understanding which sees great danger in sense impressions, and therefore show in your general attitude towards experiences? And especially after you have tasted jhana cittas, would not most of your experience in this bhumi appear rather unrefined and unattractive? What I am trying to say is that I believe Jhana is sublime, second only to Lokuttara, and that it involves panna of a level second only to Vipassana. And just as Vipassana involves development starting from lower levels up to higher ones, so too jhana starts from lower level of development before any level of jhana can be reached. In this case, one starts with seeing the difference between akusala citta and kusala citta, the danger in the former and the benefit of the latter. The jhana practitioner has so much developed his discerning capacity, that more and more subtle levels of lobha are seen and suppressed. I believe that you and I are still much of the time incapable of detecting moderate levels of akusala and even some of the very crude ones. Also he (the jhana expert) is aware of the particular characteristic of dhammas such as vitakka, vicara, piti and so on, do you know anyone who is so discerning? However, even though so much panna is involved, I don't think there is any direct relationship between this kind of understanding and that which has been taught by the Buddha, namely the conditioned nature of realities including the tilakkhana. And so I don't agree with what Howard has said below (nothing new ;-)) and what Alan is saying in another thread. Also I don't think Bhikkhu Bodhi's question about the relevance of jhana, no matter whether or not it is in fact required for Arahata magga should be raised. More about this below. ------------------------------------- Howard: If you have worked on cultivation of jhanas, consistently and intensely, but have made no progress, then, indeed, they may not be "your thing" at this time. However, if you have not attempted to cultivate them, I would say that there is no reason to presume that you have no knack for them. In any case, the Buddha certainly recommended their cultivation as something very much worth doing, and, so, it might be worthwhile to not readily dismiss them simply due to their not being permanent states. They do serve to usefully cultivate the mind, making it a fit tool. Also, if you think about it, neither is path consciousness permanent! ;-)) So dismissal on the basis of impermanence is not such a great idea. -------------------------- Sukin: Based on my above conclusion, I don't see any reason why someone who has heard the Teachings should give any particular importance to the development of kusala for the purpose of attaining Jhana. This is not to say that Jhana is of no value. However, with the understanding that the Buddha's Path has an objective quite different and far superior to jhana, I think if we entertain the thought about "using" jhana to develop vipassana, then we are at those moments missing the point of the Dhamma. And if we insist upon it and developing this into a view about what constitutes patipatti, then I believe that this is wrong view. As I said above, both the development of vipassana and jhana revolves around panna coming to understand the present moment better and sati of the corresponding level also being developed more and more. In the case of jhana, because its development at a later stage depends on repeated taking of an object of meditation, what conventionally manifests as "concentration" needs to be developed, however this is not without help from other mental factors such as vitakka and vicara. So it is clear that the concentration of jhana, lead by panna with a different objective and having as its object a 'concept', can't be *used* for insight into paramattha dhammas. Even if one were to look at this in terms of suppression of the hindrances, still it would require the level of panna which will *detach* from the present reality (here jhana citta) and instead see into the conditioned nature, particularly "anatta" of these same cittas. And if indeed there is any understanding (even intellectual) of this kind, then obviously the starting and ending point of dhamma practice would be the development of panna. And the only sensible conclusion would be to develop it "Now" and not having any idea about another time, place or particular pre-condition. Panna leads to the development of Sati and these two can only arise with kusala cittas. Concentration on the other hand, arises with all cittas and there is no such thing as the development of 'concentration' as far as the Buddha's path is concerned. One important realization to be made is that dhammas are arising all the time (and this to me is the relevance of K. Sujin's "Is there seeing now?"), only instead of sati and panna, there is avijja. *But there is always a beginning level of understanding from which one starts and develops further*. There is no need to doubt this and think instead that one's mind must first be calm and concentrated. In fact if we look closely, we might see that such ideas about doing this or that first is the product of this very avijja!! So with regard to Bhikkhu Bodhi's question, I think if we understand the Teachings correctly, then it becomes irrelevant whether an Anagami would require to practice jhana or not so as to give rise to Arahata magga. The Anagami no more has any kind of reaction towards sense objects, so I presume that if he were not experiencing satipatthana all the time, then he would easily be going in and out of jhana. But whatever be the case, I think however that to conclude that jhana is needed here is to underestimate this level of panna and giving undue importance to jhana. Had other points to make, but all slipped out of mind ;-). Anyway, Alan, this Saturday it may already be too late, but I would like to encourage you to come to the foundation next week. No formalities are involved, people can just walk in and out as they want. The Saturday English group starts at 2 PM and if you like more info, call me at 01-8254012 or email me off-list. Metta, Sukin. 39910 From: gazita2002 Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 9:58pm Subject: [dsg] Is there seeing now? Re: kusala and akusala. Hello Howard, James, Chris. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Azita - ....snip..... > the Buddha certainly recommended their cultivation as something very much > worth doing, and, so, it might be worthwhile to not readily dismiss them simply > due to their not being permanent states. They do serve to usefully cultivate the > mind, making it a fit tool. Also, if you think about it, neither is path > consciousness permanent! ;-)) So dismissal on the basis of impermanence is not > such a great idea. > > With metta, > Howard To Howard, the impermanent citta that experiences Nibbana far outweighs the impermanent jhanacitta IMO. but its not the point I particularly want to stress. I believe the life I live right here and now is perfect for developing insight: the 5 sense doors and the mind door, function appropriately - altho some would argue the opposite :-/ You and others are Kalayanamits with whom I can discuss dhamma. I read and listen to Dhamma as taught by wise people IMO, and I comtemplate what I've learnt. At the moment of kusala citta, which includes insight and jhana, there is tranquillity - passadhi- which has the characteristic of quietening down of disturbance in the metal body and consciousness. There is malleability - mudutaa - which has the characteristic of subsiding of rigidity in the mental body and consciousness. There is lightness - lahutaa. Why bother to attempt jhana when awareness and understanding of the characteristics of a presently arising dhamma are accompanied by calm, malleability, lightness. The Buddha's teachings are about detachment - complete detachment/cessation is Nibbana. Insight leads to understanding of the 3 characteristics of all conditioned phenomena; anatta, anicca, dukkha. When panna has developed to the stage of knowing these tilakkhana, not just theoretically, then attachment is slowly, slowly eradicated. I cannot be convinced at this point in time, to change my 'perfect' life and attempt something that I know little about, am not too interested in, won't eradicate defilements, even tho jhana suppresses them and is a very great type of kusala. Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita. 39911 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 10:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same', TG, Suan. Hi, Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: ... > Well, no, it's not that, Jon. I think it's just that I've been on > DSG > for so long, I've picked up the habit of talking authoritively of things > I've only read about! ;-)) > --------------------------------------------- Well, talking (whether authoritatively or otherwise) about things one has only read about may or may not be a problem, depending on where one has been doing one's reading! ;-)) And an even greater problem in my view is talking about things that one mistakenly thinks have been directly and personally experienced ;-)). On the general subject of talking about things mentioned in the teachings, there is of course a difference between (a) talking about what the texts have to say on the matter and (b) talking about the matter based on one's (necessarily limited) personal experience, or expressing a personal view on the matter. Speaking for myself, I make a point of limiting my comments to the former as far as possible, although I am aware that my posts are routinely (mis)taken by some as being in the latter category. I say as far as possible because there is much in the suttas that is open to interpretation, and we do not have extensive commentary material in English for much of the sutta pitaka, so there is inevitably a degree of 'personal' interpretation involved at times. But in principle I'm happy to be talking only about the tripitaka and commentaries (and other ancient texts), as these hold the key to the further development of intellectual understanding and direct insight for anyone who has a sound basic understanding and sees the urgency of the task. [You may see this as one of those statements that involve a degree of personal interpretation, but I could find plenty of supporting textual authority for it if pressed ;-))] Jon 39912 From: Ken O Date: Fri Dec 17, 2004 11:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Letter to B.Bodhi-'The Jhânas and the Lay Disciple ..' Hi Alan Actually I was not saying about your mail, rather what Ven B Bodhi said in this article he wrote which I like to discuss with Sarah. To me what he write shows an impressive intellectual logical reasoning yet this type of reasoning have many flaws that are not consistent with the whole nikayas (dont even need to involve abhidhamma or commentary to argue that his article has serious flaws), just by showing nikayas I can counter discuss his article for the flaws. There are two basis of serious flaws in his article first the assertation that the jhanas experiene in the culmination of enlightment are not supramundane and the second taking jhanas as the de facto right concentration as said in the 8NP using DN 22 as a basis. Others are like not taking seriously when at some sutta there is support for one to be enlighted even after coming out of 1st jhanas as what you wrote below (his assertation that one can only become arahat only through the practise of four jhanas), he also forget that one can also become enlighted after the arupa jhanas also. Why should there be after fourth then can one be an Arahant, which is show in the nikayas not a de facto condition. > What I am saying here in my previous response, is to CHANGE TRACK > once, after having achieved Jhaana to Vipassana. Here one need not > have to achieve 2nd, 3rd or 4th Jhaana, but with either Access or > Entering Concentration or with 1st Jhaana. k: Yes there are sutta support that about coming out of 1st Jhana one can be totally be enlighted. > Ven. Mahasi taught the excellent way using "Access and or Entering > Concentration", with just enough power to be mindful of the arising > and dissolution of the 6-fold sense objects or the 5 objects of > craving. k: Sorry I do not need to sit down one corner to observe the six fold sense objects, every moment is a practise if one can see the three characteristics to all cittas, regardless kusala or akusala > When one's breath is very, very still and subtle, one's mind will > be very mindfully alert and sharp. This is the right moment to then mindfull of all the arising and or dissolution of the Dharma factors. k: How do one guage ones breath very subtle, I am not trying to be sarcastic but we have to be clear what do you mean by subtle. A baby sleeping peacefully can also have subtle breath. > > As one pursue on with Vipassana mindfullness, and master over it, > one will then eventually does achieve Jhaana while in the process of being mindful of those objects and subjects rapidly arising and > dissolution, bbeing aggreagates and being NamRupa etc. k: Can one master over cittas that are anatta? Even Buddha cannot master his own kamma of cuti-citta that will come eventually to all rebirth in the six realms, so how are we going to master it. In the D.O, Buddha always say "I arise" is not a valid question, "from ignorance arise" is a valid question. Ken O 39913 From: jwromeijn Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 0:23am Subject: [dsg] Is there seeing now? Re: kusala and akusala. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "gazita2002" wrote: > ...(snip) Hallo Azita Although I have not read the whole thread "Is there seeing now' and although I don't know much of me, a reaction. To me your message sounds very wise, in general and about the (old) discussion jhana - vipassana. But I have one question. You wrote: " At the moment of kusala citta, which includes insight and jhana, there is tranquillity - passadhi- which has the characteristic of quietening down of disturbance in the metal body and consciousness. There is malleability - mudutaa - which has the characteristic of subsiding of rigidity in the mental body and consciousness. There is lightness - lahutaa. Why bother to attempt jhana when awareness and understanding of the characteristics of a presently arising dhamma are accompanied by calm, malleability, lightness." Do you really think we have two bodies: a metal body and a mental body ? And what then is 'metal' ? Do be clear: I don't believe in two (or more) kinds of body and I don't think it's in the teachings, is it ? Metta Joop 39914 From: Egbert Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 2:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same', TG, Suan. Hi Jon, I'm all for good humour, and, though it may surprise, I'm not inclined to speak emphatically of late. I am not sure that this post of yours is entirely humourous, though. Your reply to Howard's reply seems to bear this out. In this instance, I am reminded of some words of Jesus, who at times was given to speaking rather emphatically. Matthew 23:13"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the kingdom of heaven in men's faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to." It should not surprise you, given your position in this forum, that some may take their lead from you. But if there is no particular place you can lead anyone to, I would ask that you make that very emphatically clear each time you quote "the law" to deny personal experience to an audience that may include the less-well- established. That you doubt the attainability of jhana or nibbana for yourself is no reason at all to radiate this outwardly. A point to consider: a sottapanna does not doubt the Dhamma, though they may well doubt the Tipitaka and its blessed commentaries (the law for the experientally challenged). (By way of explanation; There were sottapannas well-before the Tipitaka came into being. Sottapannas have no doubt regarding the Dhamma. Therefore......the Dhamma is not the Tipitaka) I am sorry if this is harsh. It would be good if you could tone it down whilst reading it :-) Kind Regards Herman PS Looking forward to your reply re absolutes --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Hi, Howard > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > > > Hi, Nina (and TG) - > > If I may add a personal observation: I don't think that all namas > > must take an object. Nibbana is an instance of a nama that does not... > > We've heard you claim to have experienced jhana, but I think this is the > first time we've heard you claim to have personally experienced nibbana > ;-)) > > (Sorry, couldn't resist that one.) > > Jon 39915 From: Bhikkhu Samahita Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:21am Subject: The Pure Way ... !!! Friends: The 3 Universal Characteristics: All Constructions are Transient ! When one fully Understands that; One Turns Away from what is Bad. That become the Way to Purity !!! All Constructions are Miserable ! When one fully Realizes that; One Turns Away from what is Ill... Thus is the Way to mental Purity !!! All Phenomena are Impersonal ! When one fully Comprehends that; One Turns Away from what is False... This is the Way to Purification !!! Dhammapada 277-79 Friendship is the Greatest ! Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. 39916 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 2:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The 37 factors as Fourth Noble Truth? Heresy or helpful? Hello Phil, So you are on line, inspite of computer problems. I am glad. op 18-12-2004 01:29 schreef Philip op plnao@j...: quotes Tep: >> Your thought about why the 37 bodhipakkhiya dhamma (as a group) >> does not inspire you as the 4 Noble Truths (one member of the > group) >> does, is interesting. Nina: We should not think of names and classifications. Satipatthana, vipassana, the development of the eightfold Path, it all amounts to the development of right understanding at this moment. The factors of enlightenment, they all develop together so that enlightenment can be attained. We should not cling to the names. It seems that there are doubles in this long list, but these terms show different aspects. The five spiritual faculties of confidence, energy, sati, samadhi and pañña are indriyas, but become powers, balas, when they are more developed. As right understanding is developing, these factors are developing also, no need to do something about them. The Buddha showed so many aspects to remind us of the truth in different ways. For instance, he taught about khandhas, elements, aayatanas, just to show: these are dhammas to be understood directly. We read in the suttas about seeing, visible object, this is what he taught. Thus, dhammas as khandhas, etc. You were speaking of not being inclined to enthusiasm about the eightfold Path. It does not matter whether there is enthusiasm or not, it cannot always arise, we cannot make it arise. But I am sure you have found this out for yourself. Nina. 39917 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 2:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga online? Hi Larry, op 18-12-2004 01:51 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > No, there is no on-line version of Visuddhimagga but you can buy it > here: http://www.pariyatti.com/frontpage.cgi > Look for it under "Path of Purification" if you want the translation. N: I thought part of it is on line, on Rob K's web. But Larry, are you typing out all those chapters yourself??? I am always wondering where you get them from. I know you type out all those footnotes. Anumodana for all your work. Another question. Does anyone have the other transl. of the Vis., namely by Pe Maung Tin, The Path of Purity, P.T.S. Sometimes I would like to consult this, since the English is quite difficult at times. Nina. 39918 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 2:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread (186)details. Dear Tep, Just call me Nina, we use first names. That is much easier. Thank you for your kind words, and also for your excellent question, that is very much to the point. op 17-12-2004 21:05 schreef Tep Sastri op tepyawa@m...: > Although I have been impressed by the many concepts and > complexities of the Abhidhamma, I can't help wondering about > practical values of the knowledge about the various kinds of citta; > e.g.the 7th domanassa javana citta, aagantuka bhavanga citta, and so > on. How may we verify that these cittas really exist, not just only in the > book? N: Yes, I am also thinking of the practical value when studying the Vis. and Tiika. I am always thinking: what lesson can I get here. Aagantuka is very detailed, and the question is, who can experience that. But such details give us a picture of the intricacy of all the different conditions for cittas. At first I skipped this subject and I did not mention it in my Vis. and Tiika study, because like you, I was wondeirng about the practical value. But now, thanks to Htoo's clear explanation and also your question about it, I considered more the value of knowing details. This point of aagantuka shows us that after domanassa, unpleasant feeling, there cannot be immediately pleasant feeling. It shows more clearly that each citta that falls away conditions the next one by way of contiguity-condition, anantara-paccaya. It is so useful to understand even a little more about the different types of conditions. It all helps to understand anatta, even if it is only intellectual understanding. It helps as foundation. The condition of contiguity shows us that there is no break between cittas, that this life and the next lives are one long, uninterrupted stream of cittas. That is why good and bad tendencies and kamma can be accumulated from moment to moment, that is why kamma long ago can produce result today. The javanacitta that is rooted in aversion with unpleasant feeling: this is quite useful to know. We all have domanassa and it has different conditions. There are two types, one spontaneous and one induced. This is very actual. I quote from my Vis. studies: We read in the Expositor (II, p. 344): < The tenth, because it is induced Œby external aid¹, arises in one urged by others, one who remembers the offence of anothers, one who by himself keeps remembering others¹ offences and gets angry.> So, we only can find out the truth at the moment the citta with dosa arises. I quote a sutta: There are nine bases of dosa. We read in the Gradual Sayings Book of the Nines, Ch III, § 9, IV, 406): ³Monks, there are these nine bases of strife. What nine? (The thought): He has done me harm-stirs up strife; so also the thoughts: he is doing me harm; he will do me harm; he has done harm to a dear and loved one of mine; he is doing harm to such an one; he will do harm to him; he has done good to one who is not dear or loved by me; he is doing good to such an one; he will do good to him...² The Dhammasanga.ni gives the same nine bases, but adds the cases that dosa arises groundlessly, when there is too much or too little rain, when the sun is too hot or not hot enough, etc. We are inclined to believe that the causes of dosa are outside ourselves, with other people or the circumstances. The real cause is within ourselves: we cling to pleasant objects and when we do not obtain them we have aversion. The circumstances or other people are not as we would like them to be.> T: Further, can such detailed information about citta help a vipassana meditator to make better progress than other meditators who don't have the knowledge? N: It depends on the individual's inclination how many details he wants to study. We cannot experience all realities that are taught directly, but, as I said, they help for an over all picture, can help to understand conditions, they illustrate the anattaness. But, when we study, we should never forget the goal. It is good you remind us of this. We cannot measure who makes more progress. Perhaps, it would be better not to think of progress. That kind of thinking distracts from our task right now. Also progress is dependent on conditions. I am enjoying your questions, and these help me to consider the reason for my study. Nina. 39919 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 2:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: $BA$(Betasikas' study corner 77 - Volition/cetanaa (g) Hello Philip, op 18-12-2004 01:49 schreef Philip op plnao@j...: >> The akusala cetan$B!&(B(or akusala kamma) which motivates such a deed >> is capable of producing akusala vip$BiL(Ba in the form of rebirth in >> an unhappy plane of existence or it can produce akusala vip$BiL(Ba >> which arises in the course of one$BCT(B life, vip$BiL(Bacittas which >> experience unpleasant objects through the senses. > > Also, it leads to accumulation. So the unwholesome deed > is more likely to arise again, not necessarily as a result of kamma, > but because of latent accumulations, which is not the same > thing as vipaka. Is that right? N: When we commit akusala kamma, many akusala cittas are involved. The cetana is accumulated and is kamma-condition for result. The akusala cittas are accumulated as latent tendencies and are natural strong dependency for the arising again of akusala citta. We can verify this in our life. Bad habits are formed and are very tenacious. Ph: A question - does it depend on the gravity of the deed whether > the vipakacitta arises in this lifetime or with the rebirth citta, or > is that one of the imponderables? N: It is complex, because many akusala cittas are involved. If someone kills his parents it gives result in the next rebirth: rebirth in a hell plane. As to other kinds of kamma, see Nyanatiloka's Dict p. 72, 73. You see that there are many types. Such as supportive kamma, counteractive kamma, etc. As to priority of result: weighty, habitual, death-proximate, stored-up kamma. It is intricate. In a dream there may be akusala cittas, and these do not produce rebirth as result. But they are fortified by other akusala cittas and in that way there can be result. Quote from my Vis. studies: I also mentioned before that the result of kusala kamma can be less abundant because of akusala cittas (stinginess) arising after the deed of generosity. Thus, we have to consider many cittas when speaking of a good or bad deed. This to illustrate the intricacy of kamma. Nina. 39920 From: Egbert Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 2:40am Subject: Re: Suravira: Problems in My Understanding: Sarah Hi Ken, I hope there are plenty of big waves and no white pointers about. > > Is it Sarah or the Ancient Commentators who are, in your opinion, > putting words into the Buddha's mouth? I think you will find Sarah's > views are in accordance with the Ancient Commentaries, and their > views, in turn, are in accordance with the Tipitaka. > Are you aware that "the Ancient Commentaries" are in fact only "some Ancient Commentaries"? It may well be that the commentaries that John West rejects make John West the best, but then again .... Why take your lead from "some ancient commentaries" ? You have a problem with the words of the Buddha, mate? Believe me, your surfing body will die, regardless of how parramattha your dhammas are :-) Kind Regards Herman 39921 From: Egbert Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 2:58am Subject: Obstetrics Hi all, A quick straw poll to be conducted in the privacy of your own samsara. Does one need to become an obstetrician before one can become pregnant? (Commentary; does knowing how babies are conceived bring about pregnancy? Are obstetricians a necessary condition for babies, or is it vice-versa.) Kind Regards Herman 39922 From: Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 0:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ?etasikas' study corner 77 - Volition/cetanaa (g) Hi, Nina - In a message dated 12/18/04 5:41:34 AM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: > N: When we commit akusala kamma, many akusala cittas are involved. The > cetana is accumulated and is kamma-condition for result. The akusala cittas > are accumulated as latent tendencies and are natural strong dependency for > the arising again of akusala citta. We can verify this in our life. Bad > habits are formed and are very tenacious. > ======================= Would you please be so kind as to explain, in Abhidhamma terms, exactly what the kammic seeds, accumulations, or accumulated tendencies (anusaya) are? I presume they are specific sorts of cetasika that are modified in various ways and "passed along" (actually replaced) from mindstate to mindstate, as I cannot think of any other category of paramattha dhamma that is appropriate. It may well be that this has already been answered, perhaps even multiple times, in which case I apologize. There is so much information disseminated on the list that I lose track at times. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39923 From: AlanLam Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 3:17am Subject: Re: Letter to B.Bodhi-'The Jhânas and the Lay Disciple ..' --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O <....> > k: Can one master over cittas that are anatta? Even Buddha cannot > master his own kamma of cuti-citta that will come eventually to all > rebirth in the six realms, so how are we going to master it. In the > D.O, Buddha always say "I arise" is not a valid question, "from > ignorance arise" is a valid question. > > > Ken O > >Dear Ken, I am apologetic for wrongly reply to your "reply" However, I would like to respond to your last paragraph ass "Can one master Citta that are Anatta ?: Yes, Beacuse "The arising and extingushing of Citta" one has no control over it. It is thus Anatta !!!!! If a house or car belongs to one, one could sell or give away as one wishe, But the arising of "Thoughts" one has no control over it, thus it is Anatta. So does "Pain" that one has no control or command it to stop, it is non-self, no "Soul", "He". "She", "Ego: etc. Regards and Metta. I wish to add only on your last paragraph " > 39924 From: agriosinski Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 6:30am Subject: Re: lost again :) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: [...] > Agrios, there is a wealth of detail in the section of the Dispeller I > quoted from before. I can try to find more if you have any particular > qus/comments. > > Hope this helps. Excellent questions and I'm glad to look at the sutta. > thank you Sarah, it gives me some picture. It seems to me at this point that whole D.O. runs in namarupa and not in "the world" as it is analized by various comentaries. In this perspective, I perceive avija -> sankharas relation as a mental development of "ME" into namarupa. metta, Agrios 39925 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 6:53am Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread (185), Htoo. Dear Nina, Thanks for your comments and questions. Please see below. With Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Nina wrote: Dear Htoo, thank you. I have been reflecting when the Vis. study came to this. When a very great object (atimahanta) experienced during the viithi is unpleasant, there are akusala vipaakacittas before the javanas, such as seeing, etc. and the javanas are either kusala cittas or akusala cittas. After that the vipaakacittas which are tadaaramma.nacittas arise, these are also vipaakacittas. But, since they are mostly produced by the same kamma that produced rebirth, they can, in the case of a human, not be akusala vipaakacittas. Is this right, and do you have a way to check? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: [later addition after editing]-- 7th domanassa javana citta is akusala. I do not think akusala will be followed by kusala as contiguity condition. Dear Nina, you already included 'mostly'. Yes, when tadarammana cittas arise they are 'mostly' the same citta like patisandhi citta in terms of character of bhumi, jati, sankhara, sampayutta dhamma. But not the same arammana with patisandhi citta. I here also include 'mostly'. Because this happen most of the time. But not always. Because there are 11 cittas that can perform as a tadarammana citta. Patisandhi citta in a life is just one of them. All these 11 cittas are kama cittas. This is also why tadarammana cittas only arise in kama sattas or sensuous beings and they never arise in rupa brahmas and arupa brahmas. Because rupa brahmas and arupa brahmas are reborn with rupavipaka cittas and arupavipaka cittas respectively. But in kama bhumi, in kama sattas or sensuous beings when there are conditions for arising of tadarammana cittas, most of the time these tadarammana cittas will be the same as their respective patisandhi citta. But not always. There are 11 cittas that can perform the job of tadarammana citta. Most of the time tadarammana citta will be the same citta like patisandhi citta. But as I said, arammana will not be the same. But very occasionally, other cittas of 11 tadarammana cittas can perform the job of tadarammana citta. If beings are born with upekkha patisandhi, there will not be any problems. But when beings are born with somanassa patisandhi, tadarammana cannot be somanassa after 7th domanassa javana citta. Here, upekkha tadarammana citta will arise which is not the same character of patisandhi citta. So far, it has not been complicated. But when there are no tadarammana cittas, then 7th domanassa javana citta has 'apparently' to be followed by somanassa bhavanga citta. But this is not in line with anantara paccaya. Domanassa cannot be followed by somanassa as contiguity condition. So the first re-arising bhavanga citta has to be as you said 'adventitious' bhavanga citta or visiting bhavanga citta. Aagantuka means 'visiting' not 'adventitious' but it still makes sense. When beings are born with upekkha patisandhi, their tadarammana cittas will be most of the time upekkha tadarammana cittas. But when 7th javana citta is somanassa, then somanassa tadarammana cittas have to arise. Again here it is also most of the time or 'mostly'. But not always. The reason why somanassa santirana is there is that to perform somanassa function. Somanassa santirana is not patisandhi citta. You already know that. But somanassa santirana can perform santirana function and it can also perform tadarammana function. In beings with upekkha patisandhi, this somanassa santirana or one of 4 somanassa mahavipaka cittas takes the position of tadarammana citta. With Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Nina wrote: I also understand that mostly, but not always the tadaaramma.nacittas are produced by the same kamma that produced rebirth. Is this right? I have been reading about the subject in the Co. to the Abhidhamattha Sangaha. Nina. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Mostly. But not always. Yes. I have already explained above. With Metta, Htoo Naing PS: To Christine: Dhamma Threads are primarily typed directly at DSG web site. Then I forward them to JourneyToNibbana, triplegem, and dhamma- list Yahoo Groups. So far up to 3pm or 15.00 GMT 18.12.04, there is no further Dhamma Threads by me ( Htoo Naing ). Christine you can check this at JourneyToNibbana and triplegem where all messages are moderated. I will deal with the problem later. Sarah, forgive me for this message. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > op 17-12-2004 17:29 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > > > In this visayapavatti or in this vithi vara, there do arise > > tadarammana cittas. Because the object is the clearest object ever. > > As tadarammana cittas can arise in this vithi vara, there is no > > problem for both upekkha patisandhi and somanassa patisandhi puggalas > > or beings. Because there are upekkha tadarammana that can follow > > domanassa javana cittas. 39926 From: guyjz Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 6:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga online or for download? I found the first 90 pages or so on abhidhamma.org, the Bhikkhu Nanamoli translation. Why isn't there the rest of it? I have access to the book, but my point is to have computerized searching... It seems to me very likely that someone somewhere had typed it in (or scanned+OCRd) the book. So the question is does anyone know where I can get it? (I be happy with any translation I can get, but preferably Bhikkhu Nanamoli's) metta, Guy 39927 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 7:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same', TG, Suan. Hi, Herman Having difficulty figuring out just what your concern is. It seems you think I am preaching a gospel of despair, in that I "doubt the attainability of jhana or nibbana" for myself. Have I got it right? Let me ask you this: If a person who had studied the Dhamma for most of their adult life came to the conclusion that their own awareness was still weak and relatively undeveloped, would they necessarily be wrong? It may well be that that person has a different idea to you as to exactly what amounts to awareness or insight. Perhaps this would be a fruitful area for further discussion (you don't have to quote from the Tipitaka if you don't want to, but neither should there be any constraint on doing so for those who see value in it). Looking forward to your further comments. Jon --- Egbert wrote: > > > Hi Jon, > > I'm all for good humour, and, though it may surprise, I'm not > inclined to speak emphatically of late. > > I am not sure that this post of yours is entirely humourous, though. > Your reply to Howard's reply seems to bear this out. > > In this instance, I am reminded of some words of Jesus, who at times > was given to speaking rather emphatically. > > Matthew 23:13"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you > hypocrites! You shut the kingdom of heaven in men's faces. You > yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying > to." > > It should not surprise you, given your position in this forum, that > some may take their lead from you. But if there is no particular > place you can lead anyone to, I would ask that you make that very > emphatically clear each time you quote "the law" to deny personal > experience to an audience that may include the less-well- > established. That you doubt the attainability of jhana or nibbana > for yourself is no reason at all to radiate this outwardly. > > A point to consider: a sottapanna does not doubt the Dhamma, though > they may well doubt the Tipitaka and its blessed commentaries (the > law for the experientally challenged). > > (By way of explanation; There were sottapannas well-before the > Tipitaka came into being. Sottapannas have no doubt regarding the > Dhamma. Therefore......the Dhamma is not the Tipitaka) > > I am sorry if this is harsh. It would be good if you could tone it > down whilst reading it :-) > > > Kind Regards > > > > Herman 39928 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 7:31am Subject: Dhamma Thread (187) Dear Dhamma Friends, So far we have discussed upto 13th function of citta. There are 14 functions of citta. 1. patisandhi kicca or linking function 2. bhavanga kicca or life-continuing function 3. avajjana kicca or adverting function 4. dasana kicca or seeing function 5. savana kicca or hearing function 6. ghayana kicca or smelling function 7. sayana kicca or tasting function 8. phusana kicca or touching function 9. sampaticchana kicca or receiving function 10.santirana kicca or investigating function 11.votthapana kicca or determining function 12.javana kicca or impulsing function 13.tadarammana kicca or retaining function 14.cuti kicca or last existing function or dying function The last function of citta is to perform as the last moment of a life as existing. Cuti means 'move'. Life moves to another. Cuti citta arises as the last existence. As soon as it passes away, there is no more citta arises in what we think of a being. As it is last citta and its disappearence apparently seems like death, it is called dying consciousness or cuti citta. Dhamma Thread starts with basic terminology and explanation on basic Pali words and explanation on basic dhammas. We started some classification of citta as initiation. Then each dhamma citta, cetasika, rupa, nibbana, pannatti are each explained. Cittas are explained in their 89 existences. Cetasikas are explained in their 52 existence. Rupas are explained in their 28 existence. Nibbana is explained to have some general idea of what Nibbana is. Pannatti is also explained as a necessary dhamma. Then we moved to molecular level of dhamma. That is each citta and their associated cetasikas are discussed. Now we are discussing on classifications of citta again. 1st classification is on vedana classification, 2nd on hetu classification, 3rd on bhumi classification, and then 4th on jati classification. Before moving to next classification, 14 functions of citta are discussed. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39929 From: jwromeijn Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 8:15am Subject: Two or four stages of liberation ? Dear all, The article of Bhikkhu Bodhi that did arise the thread "Letter to B.Bodhi-'The Jhânas and the Lay Disciple ..'" has as base the assumption that there are four sequential stages of liberation: Sotapanna, Sakadagamin, Anagamin, Arahat. These four are mentioned in many sutta's, but not in all ! PhD-research on four Nikayas (AN, DN, MS, SN) of B.J. Manné of Utrecht University made clear also a two-stage model or a three-stage model is used. Especially the Sakadagamin (Once-returner) is given mimimal attention in the sutta's. Also passages devoted to defining the psychology or the mental state of the Anagamin (Non-returner) are rare; and the difference with another word of this stage (Opapatika) is vague. "The stage anagamin contradicts the basic buddhistteaching that enlightenment is attainable in the present lifetime. This discrepancy shows that this stage was invented later, and most likely after the time of the Buddha." She concludes that "the stages sotapanna and arahat can be regarded as pertaining to early buddhism. In the beginning, therefore, there were just two stages: that of the converts and those who had attained the goal. During the development of Buddhism the issue of rebirth came to be increasingly important, and with it, probably developing in parallet, the issue of wether liberation was attained during the lifetime or after death. ." My intuition is that this conclusion of Manne sounds logical and soteriological well. Getting a sotapanna in this life is in this way of reasoning not very very very difficult. Thousands or millions (it's difficult to count) human beings living in this moment (nearly 2005 CE) on this planet are sotapanna. (I'm afraid I'm not yet: the samyojana (fetter) of doubt/skepticism is still existing in me) Any comments ? Metta Joop 39930 From: Larry Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 10:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga online? --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Hi Larry, > op 18-12-2004 01:51 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > > No, there is no on-line version of Visuddhimagga but you can buy it > > here: http://www.pariyatti.com/frontpage.cgi > > Look for it under "Path of Purification" if you want the translation. > N: I thought part of it is on line, on Rob K's web. > But Larry, are you typing out all those chapters yourself??? > I am always wondering where you get them from. I know you type out all those > footnotes. > Anumodana for all your work. > Another question. Does anyone have the other transl. of the Vis., namely by > Pe Maung Tin, The Path of Purity, P.T.S. Sometimes I would like to consult > this, since the English is quite difficult at times. > Nina. Hi Nina, The Path of Purity is available from Pariyatti (above) and also directly from PTS. I just type a little at a time and its a good bhavana ;-) Larry 39931 From: Larry Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 10:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga online or for download? --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "guyjz" wrote: > > > I found the first 90 pages or so on abhidhamma.org, the Bhikkhu > Nanamoli translation. Why isn't there the rest of it? > I have access to the book, but my point is to have computerized > searching... > It seems to me very likely that someone somewhere had typed it in > (or scanned+OCRd) the book. > So the question is does anyone know where I can get it? (I be happy > with any translation I can get, but preferably Bhikkhu Nanamoli's) > metta, > Guy Hi Guy, Buddhist Publication Society gave Robert permission to post those first 90 pages and they gave DSG permission to post short pieces but otherwise they want to retain their copyright. I think there is an on- line Pali version that Nina is using. Larry 39932 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 11:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Thread (185), Htoo. Dear Htoo, thank you, this is clear. But, if the object of the javanacittas is an unpleasant object, the tadaramana-cittas, in the case of a human being are still kusala vipakacittas, is this right? This in contrast to the former vipaakacittas in that same process, which were in this case akusala vipaakacittas, experiencing an unpleasant object. See, the problem is now the object that is experienced. I think that then santirana-citta that is akusala vipakacitta accompanied by upekkha does the job. op 18-12-2004 15:53 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: you already included 'mostly'. Yes, when tadarammana > cittas arise they are 'mostly' the same citta like patisandhi citta > in terms of character of bhumi, jati, sankhara, sampayutta dhamma. > But not the same arammana with patisandhi citta. 39933 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 11:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga online or for download? Hi Guy, Robert Kirkpatrick first had the whole, but this was not permitted, author's right. So he had to take off part, as I understood. Maybe you can ask him. Nina. op 18-12-2004 15:23 schreef guyjz op guyjz@y...: > I found the first 90 pages or so on abhidhamma.org, the Bhikkhu > Nanamoli translation. Why isn't there the rest of it? 39934 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 11:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga online? Hi Larry, I am really amazed, and admiring you. It is such a large book. With great appreciation, also for the bhavana, NIna. op 18-12-2004 19:28 schreef Larry op LBIDD@w...: > I just type a little at a time and its a good bhavana ;-) 39935 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 11:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ?etasikas' study corner 77 - Volition/latent tendencies. Hi Howard, don't apologize, I cannot get enough from talking on latent tendencies. Too glad to have an opportunity. op 18-12-2004 14:07 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: ======================= > Would you please be so kind as to explain, in Abhidhamma terms, > exactly what the kammic seeds, accumulations, or accumulated tendencies > (anusaya) > are? N: I quote: n the ³Abhidhammatthavibhåviní² the Commentary to the ³Abhidhammatthasaògaha², Ch 7, we read: ³There are seven latent tendencies: sense desire (kåma-råga), aversion (patigha), conceit (måna), wrong view (ditthi), doubt (vicikicchå), desire for existence (continued existence, bhavaråga), and ignorance (avijjå).² We read in the Abhidhammatthasaògaha : ³The latent tendencies are just six.² Thus, the seven latent tendencies are actually six kinds of cetasikas. To conclude from the foregoing explanations of latent tendencies: the latent tendencies, anusayas, are subtle akusala dhammas which are powerful and which lie persistently in the succession of beings¹ cittas (anu can be translated as following closely and saya as sleeping). Anusaya is a reality which is powerful because it can only be eradicated by the noble Path (which is lokuttara). As we have seen, the latent tendencies are six kinds of cetasikas: attachment (lobha), aversion (dosa) conceit (måna), wrong view (ditthi), doubt (vicikicchå) and ignorance (moha) . What is the meaning of the fact that the latent tendencies pertain to feelings and objects? Conclusion: When there are still latent tendencies there are conditions for the arising of pariyutthåna defilements (medium defilements arising with the akusala citta) and these must be accompanied by feeling and other conascent dhammas. There must also be an object that is appropriate for that kind of pariyutthåna defilement, and when that defilement attaches weight to that object, it is strong. When it has fallen away, it conditions the accumulation of that kind of defilement to go on as latent tendency. > Latent tendencies condition the arising of akusala citta again and again by way of natural strong dependence condition. Kamma-condition is another type of condition. Kusala and akusala cetana are accumulated from citta to citta and can produce result later on. But, apart from kamma condition, also natural strong dependence-condition is necessary for a particular kamma to be able to produce result. By way of natural strong dependence-condition kusala conditions kusala, kusala conditions akusala (when you have aversion being tired of your good works), akusala conditions kusala (you are afraid for bad results and are then motivated to do kusala), kamma conditions vipaaka, vipaaka conditions kusala or akusala (painful feeling conditions aversion, or wisdom) etc. many factors are involved. Nina. 39936 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 11:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga online or for download? Hi Guy and Larry, yes, Jim got the Pali for us and after that Connie helped me. It is only Pali. Also the Tiika. For my iMac the decoding is not easy. http://www.tipitaka.org/tipitaka/booklistframe2.html. Guy, you can search part now in the dsg archives. And I always like to encourage others to take part in our study with remarks and input. Next week we start with the feeling khandha. Nina. op 18-12-2004 19:43 schreef Larry op LBIDD@w...: > I think there is an on- > line Pali version that Nina is using. 39937 From: Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 6:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ?etasikas' study corner 77 - Volition/latent tendencies. Hi, Nina - Thank you very much for all the excellent detail in the following. I will be saving this post of yours. I have just one question with regard to your summation, "As we have seen, the latent tendencies are six kinds of cetasikas: attachment (lobha), aversion (dosa) conceit (måna), wrong view (ditthi), doubt (vicikicchå) and ignorance (moha)" There does seem to be a case of redundancy among these "six". Are not mana, ditthi, and vicikicca all aspects of moha? (Or is the term 'moha' actually more restricted than 'avijja', with 'avijja meaning "ignorance" but 'moha' meaning only "confusion", which could be considered a particular species of "ignorance"?) With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/18/04 2:31:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: > Hi Howard, > don't apologize, I cannot get enough from talking on latent tendencies. Too > glad to have an opportunity. > op 18-12-2004 14:07 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > ======================= > >Would you please be so kind as to explain, in Abhidhamma terms, > >exactly what the kammic seeds, accumulations, or accumulated tendencies > >(anusaya) > >are? > N: I quote: > n the ³Abhidhammatthavibhåviní² the Commentary to the > ³Abhidhammatthasaògaha², Ch 7, we read: > > ³There are seven latent tendencies: sense desire (kåma-råga), aversion > (patigha), conceit (måna), wrong view (ditthi), doubt (vicikicchå), desire > for existence (continued existence, bhavaråga), and ignorance (avijjå).² > > We read in the Abhidhammatthasaògaha : ³The latent tendencies are just six.² > Thus, the seven latent tendencies are actually six kinds of cetasikas. > To conclude from the foregoing explanations of latent tendencies: the latent > tendencies, anusayas, are subtle akusala dhammas which are powerful and > which lie persistently in the succession of beings¹ cittas (anu can be > translated as following closely and saya as sleeping). Anusaya is a reality > which is powerful because it can only be eradicated by the noble Path (which > is lokuttara). As we have seen, the latent tendencies are six kinds of > cetasikas: attachment (lobha), aversion (dosa) conceit (måna), wrong view > (ditthi), doubt (vicikicchå) and ignorance (moha) . > > What is the meaning of the fact that the latent tendencies pertain to > feelings and objects? > Conclusion: When there are still latent tendencies there are conditions for > the arising of pariyutthåna defilements (medium defilements arising with the > akusala citta) and these must be accompanied by feeling and other conascent > dhammas. There must also be an object that is appropriate for that kind of > pariyutthåna defilement, and when that defilement attaches weight to that > object, it is strong. When it has fallen away, it conditions the > accumulation of that kind of defilement to go on as latent tendency. > > > Latent tendencies condition the arising of akusala citta again and again by > way of natural strong dependence condition. > Kamma-condition is another type of condition. Kusala and akusala cetana are > accumulated from citta to citta and can produce result later on. But, apart > from kamma condition, also natural strong dependence-condition is necessary > for a particular kamma to be able to produce result. By way of natural > strong dependence-condition kusala conditions kusala, kusala conditions > akusala (when you have aversion being tired of your good works), akusala > conditions kusala (you are afraid for bad results and are then motivated to > do kusala), kamma conditions vipaaka, vipaaka conditions kusala or akusala > (painful feeling conditions aversion, or wisdom) etc. many factors are > involved. > Nina. > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39938 From: Tep Sastri Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 0:18pm Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread (186)details. Dear Nina, Thank you very much for allowing me to be on the 'first-name basis' with you. And, most important, thank you for answering my questions fully and sincerely without any trace of being offended. This ability to be open-minded and unattached to the Abhidhamma clearly shows that you practice Anatta the same way that you are preaching it. From your kind and clear answer about the practical value of the study of cittas, I can deduce the following : -- It gives a map of the various states of citta. -- It gives the conditions that support the arising and falling away of citta. -- It assists us in trying to understand the various kinds of paccaya. -- It helps us understand Anatta ("even if it is only intellectual"). -- It illustrates the condition of contiguity; the stream of cittas that continues uninterruptedly. -- It explains "why good and bad tendencies and kamma can be accumulated from moment to moment". -- It is useful to know those kinds of citta that are rooted in aversion and other akusala dhamma, so that we learn to avoid them. It is really interesting to know that dosa can arise groundlessly -- maybe like that in a mind of a terrorist? About some advantages which the citta study may bring to vipassana meditators, I agree with you that some of the items in my list above are helpful for the yogi to understand the conditions that enhance his/her meditation (if applied correctly without letting the thought about progress interfere with the meditation). I appreciate your humbleness, Nina. Today I have learned that humbleness is a measure of successfulness in one's Anatta practice. Warm regards, Tep May your persistence be aroused & not lax; your mindfulness established & not confused; your body calm & not aroused; your mind centered & unified. ---[AN III.40] ======== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Tep, > Just call me Nina, we use first names. That is much easier. Thank you for > your kind words, and also for your excellent question, that is very much to > the point. > op 17-12-2004 21:05 schreef Tep Sastri op tepyawa@m...: > > Although I have been impressed by the many concepts and > > complexities of the Abhidhamma, I can't help wondering about > > practical values of the knowledge about the various kinds of citta; > > e.g.the 7th domanassa javana citta, aagantuka bhavanga citta, and so > > on. How may we verify that these cittas really exist, not just only in the > > book? > N: Yes, I am also thinking of the practical value when studying the Vis. and > Tiika. I am always thinking: what lesson can I get here. > Aagantuka is very detailed, and the question is, who can experience that. > But such details give us a picture of the intricacy of all the different > conditions for cittas. At first I skipped this subject and I did not mention > it in my Vis. and Tiika study, because like you, I was wondeirng about the > practical value. But now, thanks to Htoo's clear explanation and also your > question about it, I considered more the value of knowing details. > This point of aagantuka shows us that after domanassa, unpleasant feeling, > there cannot be immediately pleasant feeling. It shows more clearly that > each citta that falls away conditions the next one by way of > contiguity-condition, anantara-paccaya. It is so useful to understand even a > little more about the different types of conditions. It all helps to > understand anatta, even if it is only intellectual understanding. It helps > as foundation. The condition of contiguity shows us that there is no break > between cittas, that this life and the next lives are one long, > uninterrupted stream of cittas. That is why good and bad tendencies and > kamma can be accumulated from moment to moment, that is why kamma long ago > can produce result today. > The javanacitta that is rooted in aversion with unpleasant feeling: this is > quite useful to know. We all have domanassa and it has different conditions. > There are two types, one spontaneous and one induced. This is very actual. > I quote from my Vis. studies: > We read in the Expositor (II, p. 344): < The tenth, because it is induced > Œby external aid¹, arises in one urged by others, one who remembers the > offence of anothers, one who by himself keeps remembering others¹ offences > and gets angry.> > So, we only can find out the truth at the moment the citta with dosa arises. > I quote a sutta: > > There are nine bases of dosa. We read in the Gradual Sayings Book of the > Nines, Ch III, § 9, IV, 406): > ³Monks, there are these nine bases of strife. What nine? > (The thought): He has done me harm-stirs up strife; so also the thoughts: he > is doing me harm; he will do me harm; he has done harm to a dear and loved > one of mine; he is doing harm to such an one; he will do harm to him; he has > done good to one who is not dear or loved by me; he is doing good to such an > one; he will do good to him...² > The Dhammasanga.ni gives the same nine bases, but adds the cases that dosa > arises groundlessly, when there is too much or too little rain, when the sun > is too hot or not hot enough, etc. We are inclined to believe that the > causes of dosa are outside ourselves, with other people or the > circumstances. The real cause is within ourselves: we cling to pleasant > objects and when we do not obtain them we have aversion. The circumstances > or other people are not as we would like them to be.> > > T: Further, can such detailed information about citta help a vipassana > meditator to make better progress than other meditators who don't have the > knowledge? > > N: It depends on the individual's inclination how many details he wants to > study. We cannot experience all realities that are taught directly, but, as > I said, they help for an over all picture, can help to understand > conditions, they illustrate the anattaness. But, when we study, we should > never forget the goal. It is good you remind us of this. > We cannot measure who makes more progress. Perhaps, it would be better not > to think of progress. That kind of thinking distracts from our task right > now. Also progress is dependent on conditions. > I am enjoying your questions, and these help me to consider the reason for > my study. > Nina. 39939 From: Egbert Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 2:17pm Subject: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi Jon, Thanks for the feedback. I really appreciate it. > > I'm not sure if by 'knowing seeing' here you mean (a) awareness of seeing, > which I would regard as direct and immediate (or, in your terms, > unmediated), or (b) thinking about (i.e. 'processing') the moments of > seeing, which I understand to be non-direct 'analysis' of those moments. At a very basic level, there is no differentiation between sound or hearing. The words are interchangeable and simply denote the same experience. Of course, at a more fundamental level, there is no differentiation between any of the senses. But in the quest to capture the uncapturable there is the mapping of structure onto experience, which leads to the possibility of mistaking the structure for the experience. For here we are, talking about experience as though it happens in terms of subject - object. Awareness is already reflexive. Awareness of hearing is preceded by hearing - no subject, no object. Sound is consciousness. This sound is not heard. It is not known by anything else except it self (sorry about the words, it is very difficult to explain non-duality in terms of duality) Awareness of sound is consciousness of consciousness. It is subject - object. Consciousness as a building block in a re-iterative process has no upper limit. The lego-structure of consciousness of consciousness of consciousness to the nth degree may be reflected in the thought "The heavens and all its hosts rejoice as I am hearing this high-pitched whistle". But apart from this thought there is only ............... Likewise, the distinction between nama and rupa is thinking only. What is there when there is no thinking? I suggest a word for it may be nibbana. No hearing of sound, no seeing of sights and so forth. > > > Visible object, sound etc is its own knowing. When it is said that > > cittas are so fast and short-lived, this is said relative to another > > level, namely the knowing of seeing or the knowing of hearing. > ... > > From the ability of people to drive through a maze of fast- moving > > objects, whilst being reflexively aware of only their next post to > > dsg, it is clear that there is a level of knowing which operates > > very effectively without needing to be known again by itself. > > But there are limits and, from recent reports, apparently enforcement of > the 'off-side' rule in soccer requires an ability beyond that limit! This sounds very interesting. Could you elaborate some more? > > > What are visible object and sound other than visible object and > > sound? Are they something lesser than what they are before they are > > known as having been seen or heard? > > > > This is not a metaphysical question. But there is room to doubt the > > validity of any suggestion that sound becomes sound by virtue of > > being heard (reflexively in a secondary consciousness) or likewise > > that visible object becomes so by virtue of being seen. > > According to my understanding of the texts, the opposite is suggested, namely, that sound must have arisen already for it to become the object of hearing consciousness. Yes, I agree, with you, and with the texts if that's what they say :- ) The sound does not need to heard. It is just sound. Having been sound, it does not need to know again it was sound. The unnecessary iterative processes that follow sound ARE samsara. Samsara is learnt. It can be unlearnt. Guarding the senses comes to mind. Samsara is not nibbana, but it happens in the midst of it. > > > The need for liberation is the need to be liberated from the > > clutching at reflexive knowing of what has already been and gone and > > been duly known by itself. > > An interesting spin on the purpose and goal of the teachings. I'll have > to think about that... > Cheers, Herman 39940 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 2:26pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Thread (185), Htoo. Dear Nina, How interesting the Dhamma is when we investigate them in detail! If object is anittharammana normally cittas will be akusala vipaka cittas. But vedanawise ( when in javana ), vedana of javana cittas may be somanassa, domanassa, or upekkha vedana. Everyone knows rotten flesh is not a good one. Let us investigate three beings. 1. vulture, 2. ordinary man, 3. arahat Pancadvaravajjana citta is kiriya citta. But when cakkhuvinnana citta arises, it is ahetuka akusala vipaka cakkhuvinnana citta for all 3 beings ( vulture, ordinary man, and arahat ). Sampaticchana citta and santirana citta will both be ahetuka akusala vipaka cittas. Manodvaravajjana citta who does the job of votthapana citta is a kiriya citta. This is abyakata dhamma. According to 'anantara paccaya', abyakata dhamma can be followed by akusala dhamma or kusala dhamma or abyakata dhamma. In case of the vulture, lobha mula cittas will follow this abyakata citta. And vedanawise they may be somanassa vedana. As lobha citta is akusala dhamma, all javana will be akusala dhamma. Again tadarammana citta will be upekkha santirana of akusala vipaka citta. Somanassa can be followed by upekkha. Bhavanga cittas will all be akusala vipaka no doubt because he is an animal. In case of the man, dosa mula citta may arise as javana citta. Votthapana citta is kiriya and upekkha. Domanassa javana cittas are all akusala dhamma. So tadarammana cittas will be upekkha and not somanassa. If there is no tadarammana 'adventitious bhavanga citta has to arise to fill up 'anantara paccaya'. In case of the arahat, votthapana citta is kiriya. All javana cittas will also be kiriya cittas. But they will not be somanassa mahakiriya cittas but upekkha mahakiriya cittas. Then tadarammana cittas will be upekkha. When there is no tadarammana cittas, then adventitious bhavanga citta has to arise to link with somanassa bhavanga if the patisandhi of arahat is somanassa patisandhi. We need to be careful that vipaka cittas are abyakata dhammas. They are not akusala dhammas or kusala dhammas even though they are results of akusala dhammas or kusala dhammas. With much respect, Htoo Naing PS: Please see below for in line text reply. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Nina wrote: Dear Htoo, thank you, this is clear. But, if the object of the javanacittas is an unpleasant object, the tadaramana-cittas, in the case of a human being are still kusala vipakacittas, is this right? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Rotten flesh is an unpleasant object. Tadarammana cittas will follow 7th domanassa javana citta. They are not somanassa. So they may be one of 4 upekkha mahavipaka cittas, or one of 2 upekkha santirana cittas. But I do not know and I do not think as you said. What is sure is that the man will have kusala vipaka bhavanga cittas. I think tadarammana may be any of 11 cittas but have to comply with preceeding dhamma. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Nina wrote: This in contrast to the former vipaakacittas in that same process, which were in this case akusala vipaakacittas, experiencing an unpleasant object. See, the problem is now the object that is experienced. I think that then santirana-citta that is akusala vipakacitta accompanied by upekkha does the job. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Once I used a simile of 2 gate-keepers. One is pancadvaravajjana citta and another gate-keeper is manodvaravajjana citta doing votthapana citta's job. Both are not kusala or akusala. But both are abyakata dhamma. When object is anittharammana or unsighty view here cakkhuvinnana citta, sampaticchana, and santirana cittas will all be akusala vipaka citta. Before is abyakata dhamma that is pancadvaravajjana citta. After is also abyakata dhamma that is manodvaravajjana citta doing votthapana citta's job. Javana cittas may differ according to individual's accumulation. There are some who read Dhamma Threads with domanassa javana cittas. Some will read with upekkha javana cittas. Some will read with somanassa javana cittas. This difference is because of their accumulation. With Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >op 18-12-2004 15:53 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > you already included 'mostly'. Yes, when tadarammana > > cittas arise they are 'mostly' the same citta like patisandhi citta > > in terms of character of bhumi, jati, sankhara, sampayutta dhamma. > > But not the same arammana with patisandhi citta. 39941 From: gazita2002 Date: Sat Dec 18, 2004 2:30pm Subject: Is there seeing now? kusala and akusala./Sukin Hello Sukin, hope things are going well for you. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinder" wrote: > > Hi Azita, Howard, Alan, > > Sukin: > I am not sure what the influence would be had someone developed > jhanas in previous lives to such proficiency that he could readily > replicate any 'learnt' meditation object in his mind. Could there be > conditions in this life whereby such an image would arise and cause him > to experience moments of jhana? I don't know. > However, don't you think that generally jhana is not a matter simply of > concentrating on an object and being able to subsequently reproduce a > similar object in the mind? Does not jhana involve panna of a very high > level, though this is not the same as vipassana panna? Were jhana > cittas to arise and fall as part of your experience wouldn't this imply the > level of understanding which sees great danger in sense impressions, > and therefore show in your general attitude towards experiences? And > especially after you have tasted jhana cittas, would not most of your > experience in this bhumi appear rather unrefined and unattractive? Azita: some great points here Sukin. I understand what you're stating here and its the last sentence that hits home the most. Bec. jhana cittas do seem to be very 'attractive', sublime, refined, peaceful; could there possible be an attachment to them? That contradicts what you have stated a little later about "seeing the difference bet. akusala citta and kusala citta, the danger in the former, the benefit in the latter", and further, you state "more and more subtle levels of lobha are seen and suppressed". Maybe conditions are such that as jhana cittas are developed to higher and higher degrees,