 
2800 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Mon Jan 8, 2001 8:50pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re:_Papañca_[again]

 
  Dear Amara,

--- amara chay  wrote: > 
> 
> 
> > Thanks for this clarification.  I am relieved to
> hear
> > that the original reference was to recitals rather
> > than a mantras! (I don't know about dictionary
> > definitions, but I believe the 2 terms are
> generally
> > understood as having distinctly different
> meanings).
> 
> 
> Dear Jonothan,
> 
> Could you elaborate?

Well it's conditioned a lot of thinking about my one
experience of mantra chanting and I'm scratching my
head (as Mike would say) trying unsuccesfully to
remember the words.

Back 25yrs to those Bodh Gaya days, I had gone for a
retreat from the retreat to Rajghir. One day I climbed
Vulture's Peak and at the top there was a beautiful
and very simple white Japanese temple. I decided to
stay a couple of days and remember the lovely noodles
and little dishes and of course everything was
spotlessly clean. The only rule seemed to be that we
had to rise early early (o.k. no problem for me), but
while half asleep, we had to beat drums and gongs to a
rhythm while chanting the mantra...sth rae sth sth sth
sth sth (sorry, maybe there was more lobha for the
noodles which I could describe exactly!). 

Anyway, I tried hard but I was quite hopeless at
putting it all together, especially when we started
beating the drums and gongs and repeating the mantra
WHILST climbing a steep, rocky path to the very top!

Mike or someone else may remember the mantra. I JUST
found out that Jonothan had a similar experience
staying there with Phra Dhammadharo (who didn't need
to  follow the ritual). Jonothan did and remembers the
drums but not the mantra either.

Amara, the Hare Krishna and T-M people also use
mantras composed of a few words repeated over and over
again (not necessarily with any meaning) to bring
about some change of consciousness. I had thought at
the time that the mantra at the Japanese temple was in
Japanese, but now I know a little more about Chinese
and Japanese, I doubt it, as they were all
monosyllabic sounds. I never checked whether there was
any meaning. Actually it was quite fun and I'd happily
repeat the experience!

You know about recitals as you were brought up with
them!

Sarah
> 



 
2801 From: Dan Dalthorp  <> 
Date: Mon Jan 8, 2001 8:54pm
Subject: Mahasi and Goenka

 
  Anumodana, Goenkaji! Anumodana, Ven. Mahasi Sayadaw! I rejoice at the 
wondrous work you have done spreading Dhamma and goodwill to thousands 
and thousands of people for their lasting benefit. If only we could 
all be such magnificent knights of Dhamma, helping people liberate 
themselves from suffering.

 
2802 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Mon Jan 8, 2001 10:20pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re:New year resolution

 
  Shin

Good post, and anumodana in your kusala.

Just a reminder to you and others.  When replying to
an incoming message, please remember to delete
non-relevant material.  Your message came with the
whole of today's daily digest attached!

Jonothan

--- shinlin  wrote: > Dear Dhamma
friends,
>     It is already New Years. Usually before meeting
> and hearing dhamma, I
> would usually think of new year resolutions for the
> next year. BUT things
> has changed after understanding the dhamma. At the
> beginning, I thought
> Dhamma would change my life for the better. BUT all
> that was the wrong view
> of learning dhamma. I have realized that learning
> the dhamma is not
> expecting or wanting for a change but understanding
> the truth of everything
> and realities, which enhance the understanding of
> anattaness of everything
> and development of the right view. Lately, Archan
> Sujin taught us how to
> really understand and contemplate the realities as
> it is. And from there, I
> have realized that I have been only understanding
> dhamma at the level of
> thinking, and not the real contemplating and
> understanding of realities.
> From these past lessons, I have realized that many
> of our dhamma friends are
> in the same situation as me. Therefore today, I have
> decided on advising
> everyone my misunderstanding of dhamma, in hoping
> this can allow you to
> ponder yourself whether if it is really
> understanding the realities or you
> think you understand the realities. This is very
> important because thinking
> that you understand, includes a big self in there. I
> am not here to attack
> anybody or cause any akusula citta for anyone, and
> if my letter has attack
> any of you, pls forgive me because my intentions are
> not to offend you in
> any ways.
> with metta,
> shin
> Ms.Shin Lin
> Zebra Computer Company Limited
> 1091/71-73, Petchburi 33, New Petchuri Rd
> Rajathavee, Phayathai, Bangkok, Thailand 10400
> Tel : 66-2-6516000 ( 35 lines )
> Fax : 66-2-6516001
> company website : - www.zebra.co.th



 
 
2803 From: amara chay   
Date: Mon Jan 8, 2001 10:24pm
Subject: Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!"

 
  > From time to time, I find it interesting to compare Theravada 
> teachings with Christian teachings. By and large, I've found a large 
> degree of concord between the two traditions, although the language 
> and approaches are strikingly dissimilar. 


Dear Dan,

As usual, we are in direct opposition, or almost, and I look forward 
to more stimulating discussion.  Christianity is focused on God, from 
the very first sentence in the Bible, when God created light, the 
universe, men etc.  The motivation for men is to fear and love God 
and total obeissance, 'his will be done', disobedience and loving 
other Gods are punishable by hell, unless the lost sheep repents.  

Well, God does not exist in Buddhism, everything arises because of 
conditions, the universe is formed and destroyed by conditions over 
and over, and men are born and reborn of their own kamma, even brahma 
who are considered gods by some, or deva who can perform miracles, 
could not create a man, or kill him, if it were not his kamma to die 
or be born that way.  With the right conditions, however, anything is 
possible, the Buddha taught that we have all been born evrywhere from 
the lowest hell to the highest brahma heavens (except for one where 
only the anagami would be reborn, if I remember correctly).  

But the most important difference between Buddhism and any other 
teachings is that he taught that the soul is not one continuous 
consciousness that arise at birth and passes to heaven/hell/purgatory 
but what are normally imperceptible, extremely rapidly arising and 
falling away instants of intelligence/consciousness in what is called 
khanika marana (the death that occurs each instant of citta), over 
which no one has control whatever.  Instants of seeing and hearing at 
this moment could never last, they change and can never be brought 
back in exactly the same way again.  

Because of the rapidity of the succession of the citta, we think we 
see and hear at the same time, in fact they are interposed by 
instants of citta through the mind door, and that is what the first, 
weakest and lowest vipassana nana manifests: the differences between 
the rupa that arise through the five dvara and the mind dvara, as the 
nama-rupa-paricheda-nana (the complete separation of the nama and the 
rupa).  This Knowledge could only come from a very highly developed 
degree of knowledge of things as they really are, accumulated little 
by little through satipatthana.

Satipatthana is also taught in no other religion in the world- how 
could they, since they regard the soul as an entity, not instants of 
succeeding citta?  But it can be proven by anyone for himself, 
(ehipassiko- come try it out, or 'check it out!', as Betty would 
say,) we all have eyes, ears, noses, tongues, body sense and minds.  
We would never be able to experience anything at all without them.  
But our kamma created them and we are presently their slaves, 
thinking that they are our selves.  By knowing them as they really 
are, as well as their individual kinds of aramana, we could come to 
see them as they really are: conditioned realities that arise and 
fall away, then where is the beloved, unique and interesting selves?

And though we might think we understand the theories, it is only the 
right level of understanding that could really bring the real instant 
of knowledge that lessen the clinging to the self, starting with the 
knowlege that will leave no more uncertainty that we are indeed only 
nama and rupa, experiencing the normally hidden nama of the mano 
dvara.  But that knowledge could only be reached by studying 
realities as they really are, as they arise at this moment around us, 
the real characteristics of visible objects before us, so different 
from sound, sight, touch.  These tiny instants of knowledge would 
accumulate and grow towards the strength when realization could 
arise, although one could never know when that will happen.  But 
without the study, the knowledge would never grow to that level at 
all and we would still be clinging to the self even though we 
understood the theory on the intellectual level perfectly.



> ... we are almost 
> assured to misunderstand and misrepresent others' views.


Interesting that you should mention this, here is a passage from an 
article in the advanced section of <http://www.dhammastudy.com/> you 
might like:

Anguttara Nikaya, Dasaka Nipata, Samatha-Sutta: on habits to be 
formed or avoided.  

'Behold Bhikkhu: Should the bhikkhu not be knowledgeable in the 
instants of citta of others, then he should study to be knowledgeable 
in the instants of his own citta.  Behold, bhikkhu, he should study 
thus.'

Sujin: Perhaps we should already begin the discussion now.  While the 
Buddha's words might seem brief but in reality there is much to 
consider and examine, for example the phrase ' Should the bhikkhu not 
be knowledgeable in the instants of citta of others '.  This applies 
not only to bhikkhus, but to anyone who thinks they know what other 
people think.  Do they really know, or could they only guess without 
being able to tell whether the other person's citta might be 
thinking, seeing or performing any of the functions involving the 
citta. 

'Then he should study to be knowledgeable in the instants of his own 
citta.' 

This is already a reminder, which is the most important thing for 
those who like to criticize others, who are preoccupied with others, 
but are not mindful of their own citta whether the thinking is kusala 
or akusala.  Therefore the highest beneficence is not to be able to 
change other's akusala thoughts but one's own at that moment of 
thinking of others as kusala and akusala of which there can be 
mindfulness to know the truth, until there can be change from akusala 
to more kusala. 

Such bits of sayings may not seem like much, but those who read with 
discernment for the beneficence of the dhamma would greatly profit 
from it and remind themselves with it. 


This is from the beginning of a longish discussion about the 'Samatha 
Sutta', which is the title of the article.

Amara

 
2804 From: amara chay   
Date: Mon Jan 8, 2001 10:31pm
Subject: Re:_Papañca_[again]

 
  > Well it's conditioned a lot of thinking about my one
> experience of mantra chanting and I'm scratching my
> head (as Mike would say) trying unsuccesfully to
> remember the words.
> 
> Back 25yrs to those Bodh Gaya days, I had gone for a
> retreat from the retreat to Rajghir. One day I climbed
> Vulture's Peak and at the top there was a beautiful
> and very simple white Japanese temple. I decided to
> stay a couple of days and remember the lovely noodles
> and little dishes and of course everything was
> spotlessly clean. The only rule seemed to be that we
> had to rise early early (o.k. no problem for me), but
> while half asleep, we had to beat drums and gongs to a
> rhythm while chanting the mantra...sth rae sth sth sth
> sth sth (sorry, maybe there was more lobha for the
> noodles which I could describe exactly!). 
> 
> Anyway, I tried hard but I was quite hopeless at
> putting it all together, especially when we started
> beating the drums and gongs and repeating the mantra
> WHILST climbing a steep, rocky path to the very top!
> 
> Mike or someone else may remember the mantra. I JUST
> found out that Jonothan had a similar experience
> staying there with Phra Dhammadharo (who didn't need
> to  follow the ritual). Jonothan did and remembers the
> drums but not the mantra either.
> 
> Amara, the Hare Krishna and T-M people also use
> mantras composed of a few words repeated over and over
> again (not necessarily with any meaning) to bring
> about some change of consciousness. I had thought at
> the time that the mantra at the Japanese temple was in
> Japanese, but now I know a little more about Chinese
> and Japanese, I doubt it, as they were all
> monosyllabic sounds. I never checked whether there was
> any meaning. Actually it was quite fun and I'd happily
> repeat the experience!



Dear Sarah,

Thanks for this lovely explanation!  I really needed all that 
laughter, (I know, lobha!) and now I also know what 'mantra' is to a 
westerner!  Did you know that the recitals I used to do in my young 
and obedient days were called in Thai 'suad mon' (reciting mantra) 
which is why to my mind they are sort of synonyms.

Thanks for everything,

Amara

 
2805 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Mon Jan 8, 2001 10:34pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Precepts - Intoxicants

 
  Metta Jon

Welcome to the list, and thank you for this very
informative post.  I am impressed by your obvious
familiarity with the suttas.

Your citations are directly on point.  I particularly
like the reference to digging up one's own roots in
this world.

--- Metta Jon wrote: >
Jonathan,
> 
> You asked for scriptural references?
> 
> The first one that comes to mind is Dhammapada
> 247-248 (Chapter 18,
> [Impurities],  verses 12-13): 
> 
> "Whosoever in this world destroys life, tells lies,
> takes what is 
> not given, goes to another's wife, and is given to
> the use of 
> intoxicants, such a one digs up his own roots in
> this world." 
> 
> A reference that really spells things out is in the
> Dhammika Sutta
> of the Sutta Nipata (Sn.398-399):
> 
> "The layman who joyfully abides in self-control,
> knowing that the
> use of intoxicants results in loss of self-control,
> should not
> indulge in taking intoxicants, nor should he cause
> others to do so,
> nor approve of others so doing.  Fools commit evil
> deeds as a result
> of intoxication, and cause others who are negligent
> to do the same.
> One should avoid this occasion for evil, this
> madness, this delusion,
> this joy of fools."
> 
> Also from the Sutta Nipata (Maha Mangala Sutta,
> Sn.264):
> 
> "...to abstain from intoxicants, and to be diligent
> in virtue,
> these are the Highest Blessings."

As you point out, there are any number of excuses and
contrivances by those who don't see the danger in
intoxicants.

> There are some Westerners who are attracted to
> Buddhism, but who
> wish to believe that the precept is to abstain from
> intoxication,
> but the wording of the precept clearly says that one
> abstains 
> from the use of intoxicants, which are the occasion
> for heedlessness.
> 
> One or two people tried to tell me that if someone
> is a "Bodhisattva
> with a high level of realization" that they could
> drink alcohol and
> not be affected."  My response to that is: if they
> have such a high
> level of realization, then they would have no
> attachment to or 
> craving for alcohol, and thus would not drink it. 
> One man said to 
> me: "But the Buddha was enlightened, and he still
> ate food."  To
> which i responded: "Food is necessary for life;
> alcohol is not.  The
> Buddha ate food so that he could support his body
> and mind to teach
> the Dhamma (Dharma) to others."  Had i been in a
> sarcastic frame of
> mind, i could have said, "When YOU become a
> Bodhisattva with a high
> level of realization, then talk to me about it."
> 
> Some Buddhists will tell you that enlightened beings
> don't need to
> follow precepts.  This is true, but ONLY because
> their behavior
> automatically conforms to the Dhamma.  When your
> character is such
> that killing, stealing, lying, etc., are IMPOSSIBLE
> for you to 
> commit, then you don't need the precepts to tell you
> not to do those
> things--because you wouldn't do them anyway.  The
> great sage named
> Bodhidharma was quoted as saying: "Buddhas don't
> keep precepts; 
> Buddhas don't break precepts."
> 
> i hope that this helps anyone who is interested in
> this subject.

I'm sure it does

> Sukhita hotha,
> 
> Metta Jon Maslow

Thanks
Jonothan



 
2806 From: amara chay   
Date: Mon Jan 8, 2001 10:35pm
Subject: Re: Mahasi and Goenka

 
  > Anumodana, Goenkaji! Anumodana, Ven. Mahasi Sayadaw! I rejoice at 
the 
> wondrous work you have done spreading Dhamma and goodwill to 
thousands 
> and thousands of people for their lasting benefit. If only we could 
> all be such magnificent knights of Dhamma, helping people liberate 
> themselves from suffering.


Dear Dan,

Perhaps they should also compare them to the Tipitaka/Commentaries 
also or is that out of the question?

Amara

 
2807  
Date: Mon Jan 8, 2001 10:37pm
Subject: Re:New year resolution

 
  Dear Ms. Shin Lin,

   What are you talking about?  Was someone's feeling hurt?

   Anyway, thank you for the note.  You wrote:

"Lately, Archan Sujin taught us how to really understand and 
contemplate the realities as it is. And from there, I have realized 
that I have been only understanding dhamma at the level of thinking, 
and not the real contemplating and understanding of realities. "

   Please repeat what Archan Sujin taught because I'm sure that it's 
important and helpful to a lot of us.  Thank you.

Best New Year Wishes,
Alex Tran

 
2808 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Mon Jan 8, 2001 11:01pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: sitting "vs" non-sitting; vitakka, vicara and samatha, pannati and paramattha dhammas

 
  Mike

--- "m. nease"  wrote: 
> Dear Robert and Jonothan,
> 
> --- Robert Kirkpatrick
>  wrote:
> 
> Thanks for your comments and for reposting
> Jonothan's
> extraordinary post.  This is the best post I've seen
> yet on this topic (& item #10 even hints strongly at
> the 'robes' issue--and a hidden connection between
> these issues), I think.

I am glad you found it useful

  I went to save it in my
> 'Jonothan' directory, and found it was already
> there--it was the first response Jonothan sent to me
> when I was still quite new to the list.
> 
> I think it would be good to post this as a file on
> the
> e-groups page--especially with as many references to
> the tipitaka as possible--as a quick response to
> curious newcomers who are bound to bring up this
> question again and again.

I agree it needs references (and further working on). 
The idea was to collect references as I came across
them for later inclusion.  Hasn't happened, I'm
afraid.  Any suggestions from any direction gratefully
received.

Jonothan

> So many of us came into the Theravada by way of
> modern
> meditation schools which tend to present their
> approaches--often (if not always) reductionistic and
> rather radical as to interpretation--as being the
> true, original buddhadhamma and a kind of solution
> to
> modern misconceptions.  With this as a background,
> our
> first look at understanding by way of the
> abhidhamma-pitaka often gives the impression of a
> really radical and intellectual approach.
> 
> It's no wonder that so many of us look askance, at
> first, at at a truly ancient approach with its roots
> in ALL of the dhamma-vinaya--not just a few selected
> suttas--as one that turns 'the dhamma'
> upside-down--instead of setting it upright, as I
> believe it actually does.
> 
> I hope the two of you have developed paramis number
> five and six, viriya and khanti, sufficiently to
> continue repeating these points for the benefit of
> those (I forget what we're called), who find the
> path
> slow and difficult.
> 
> Saadhu!
> 
> mike

PS  I'm impressed at your organizational skills as
reflected in your folder system.  I would be
interested to know how you get text from your email
program to your hard drive - by copy and paste, or as
an actual file?  I haven't worked out a satisfactory
system yet!
Please share a few tips.


 
2809 From: Dan Dalthorp  <> 
Date: Mon Jan 8, 2001 11:28pm
Subject: Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!"

 
  Dear Amara,
Christianity is indeed focused on "God," but getting past some of the 
superficialities of the words and thinking about what could Christians 
possibly mean by the use of such a word, it becomes clear that not 
many envision a white-bearded traffic director in the sky. Instead, 
"God" makes much more sense if thought of as "law of nature." Reading 
the Christian Bible with this notion of what "God" is (and why not?!) 
reveals that many of the Judeo-Christian prophets had a fairly good 
understanding of Dhamma--including the Four Noble truths as central to 
Christian doctrine (although they are not real clear about the fourth) 
and forming a current running through much of the scriptures and 
anatta-anicca-dukkha are discussed frequently in beautiful 
descriptions of the concepts (although the language is quite different 
from the Buddhist). I don't have enough time to get into any detail 
about this right now, but I'm glad your interested in hearing a little 
more. It is a very interesting topic.

I do want to leave you with an interesting idea to ponder. Buddha said 
something like (paraphrase): "Even if bandits savagely sever you limb 
by limb, he whose mind gives rise to hatred towards them is not 
following my teachings" (MN 21). Now, Jesus was tortured to death, but 
as he was being killed he displayed nothing but compassion for his 
assailants (paraphrase): "Father forgive them for they have no idea 
what they are doing." Jesus was not a follower of Buddha (he most 
likely had never heard of Buddha), but a man who feels only compassion 
for the men who torture him to death IS a follower of the Buddha's 
teachings. Even though he wasn't at all fluent in the language of 
Abhidhamma, Jesus displayed an incredible amount of wisdom. Can this 
man, who never heard even heard the word "Buddha", be more strongly 
grounded in Dhamma and wisdom than we who know hundreds or thousands 
of Pali words and can cogently discuss intricacies of Abhidhamma? 
Christians call him "Son of God" for the force of his metta and 
karuna. I'd prefer to call him "Student of Dhamma."

 
2810 From: amara chay   
Date: Mon Jan 8, 2001 11:50pm
Subject: Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!"

 
  > Christianity is indeed focused on "God," but getting past some of 
the 
> superficialities of the words and thinking about what could 
Christians 
> possibly mean by the use of such a word, it becomes clear that not 
> many envision a white-bearded traffic director in the sky. Instead, 
> "God" makes much more sense if thought of as "law of nature." 
Reading 
> the Christian Bible with this notion of what "God" is (and why 
not?!) 
> reveals that many of the Judeo-Christian prophets had a fairly good 
> understanding of Dhamma--including the Four Noble truths as central 
to 
> Christian doctrine (although they are not real clear about the 
fourth) 
> and forming a current running through much of the scriptures and 
> anatta-anicca-dukkha are discussed frequently in beautiful 
> descriptions of the concepts (although the language is quite 
different 
> from the Buddhist). I don't have enough time to get into any detail 
> about this right now, but I'm glad your interested in hearing a 
little 
> more. It is a very interesting topic.


Dear Dan,

Very, indeed!  Although the Ursuline nuns at the Mater Dei School I 
attended as a child would probably say countless prayers for your soul 
if they heard your view of their God to whom they are married!

If you have time, do elaborate.  I may even show some of the things 
you said to my Christian friends.


> I do want to leave you with an interesting idea to ponder. Buddha 
said 
> something like (paraphrase): "Even if bandits savagely sever you 
limb 
> by limb, he whose mind gives rise to hatred towards them is not 
> following my teachings" (MN 21). Now, Jesus was tortured to death, 
but 
> as he was being killed he displayed nothing but compassion for his 
> assailants (paraphrase): "Father forgive them for they have no idea 
> what they are doing." Jesus was not a follower of Buddha (he most 
> likely had never heard of Buddha), but a man who feels only 
compassion 
> for the men who torture him to death IS a follower of the Buddha's 
> teachings. 


I doubt that anyone who knows 'kammasakata' (each person having his 
own kamma' would ask 'law of nature' to 'forgive' anyone, since 
forgiveness is for the kusala citta of the person who forgives, 
nothing to do with what the perpetrator of the kamma who must receive 
the vipaka (result of kamma) whether anyone forgives him or not.  By 
the way, there is an article on 'Kammasakata-nana', a great personal 
favorite of mine, in the advance section of 
<http://www.dhammastudy.com/>, which might be of interest.

Hope you find the time to read it someday,

Amara


Even though he wasn't at all fluent in the language of 
> Abhidhamma, Jesus displayed an incredible amount of wisdom. Can this 
> man, who never heard even heard the word "Buddha", be more strongly 
> grounded in Dhamma and wisdom than we who know hundreds or thousands 
> of Pali words and can cogently discuss intricacies of Abhidhamma? 
> Christians call him "Son of God" for the force of his metta and 
> karuna. I'd prefer to call him "Student of Dhamma."

 
2811 From: Dan Dalthorp  <> 
Date: Mon Jan 8, 2001 11:57pm
Subject: Re: Vedana associated with contemplating anatta

 
  Dear Jonathon,
I don't find anything contradictory between Mahasi's and Buddhagosa's 
comments. Buddhagosa does not discuss consciousnesses immediately 
before bhaya-nana arises. Instead, he describes the experience of 
bhaya-nana itself. Mahasi's comments apparently refer to an instant of 
real fear which immediately spins into bhaya-nana as the mind reacts 
wisely to the incipient "fear" before it develops into 
full-fledged dosa. He does use the phrase "At that time...", but 
everything happens very quickly... His "at that time" may be a slip 
into everyday language and not a real confusion of the significance of 
each individual thought moment. I believe that Mahasi was wise enough 
to understand that panna does not arise coincident with domanassa. 

> Dhd5
> 
> I am coming in here without having read all the later
> posts – I know from experience that if I wait until I
> am up-to-date I won't get to post anything – so
> apologies in advance if I am going over ground already
> covered.
> 
> >           Mahasi clearly
> > indicated that the 
> > bhaya-nana is knowledge of a directly experienced
> > fear: "[The yogi's] 
> > mind itself is gripped by fear and seems helpless."
> > This accords more 
> > closely to my reasoning and experience than do your
> > deviations from 
> > Tipitaka. Your deviation from Tipitaka is writing
> > that the bhaya-nana 
> > is not derived from a real, directly experienced
> > fear, that it 
> > is not wisdom regarding a real, directly experienced
> > fear. Please note 
> > that I do not say that you contradict Tipitaka, only
> > that you are 
> > extrapolating or deviating from Tipitaka. Your
> > extrapolation differs 
> > from Mahasi's, and it differs from mine, but to the
> > best of my 
> > knowledge, none of the extrapolations contradicts
> > Tipitaka.
> 
> I don't know if you would agree, but it seems to me
> that the 2 commentaries – Buddhaghosa's and Mahasi
> Sayadaw's – are mutually exclusive, ie they can't both
> be right.  So it is perhaps a question as to which of
> the 2 accords more fully with the Tipitaka.  As far as
> I know, Buddhaghosa has never been faulted on this
> score in the 1500 years or so that the Visuddhimagga
> has been around.  But it will be interesting to see
> what Amara comes up with in her search of the
> Attasalini.
> 
> Jonothan
> 
> 

 
2812  
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 0:19am
Subject: Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!"

 
  Dear Amara and Dan,

   This topic sounds interesting.  I've enjoyed Dan's posts very much.

   Now, at our temple, there's a visiting monk who's very very 
gentle.  He was trained to be a Catholic priest.  Right after 
graduating to be a priest, he studied Theravada Buddhism because his 
great grandmother warned him that those Buddhis monks were only a 
bunch of beggars!  He got curious about them.  Then, he became one 
himself.  And he's stayed with the Sangha since early 1960s.  A few 
weeks ago, he said that on the surface, perhaps even on the 
intermediate level of understanding, Christianity and Buddhism appear 
the same, but on the higher level, they are completely different.  

   Thank you, Dan, for sharing.  I'm looking forward to read Amara's 
posts about her learning experience about Catholicism and 
Christianity in the eyes of a Buddhist.

Anumodana,
Alex Tran

 
2813 From: amara chay   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 0:39am
Subject: Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!"

 
  >    Now, at our temple, there's a visiting monk who's very very 
> gentle.  He was trained to be a Catholic priest.  Right after 
> graduating to be a priest, he studied Theravada Buddhism because his 
> great grandmother warned him that those Buddhis monks were only a 
> bunch of beggars!  He got curious about them.  Then, he became one 
> himself.  And he's stayed with the Sangha since early 1960s.  A few 
> weeks ago, he said that on the surface, perhaps even on the 
> intermediate level of understanding, Christianity and Buddhism 
appear 
> the same, but on the higher level, they are completely different.  


Dear Alex,

Thank you for the story, it's so interesting how each individual come 
to Buddhism, isn't it?  All the different accumulations, each and 
everyone. 

Amara

 
2814 From: Dan Dalthorp  <> 
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 1:01am
Subject: Re: Three types of wisdom

 
  Dear Jonathon,

You wrote:
> I would not agree that it is necessary to deviate from
> the Tipitaka.  Deviation surely connotes inconsistency
> with.
Deviation need not connote inconsistency. There are a lot of things 
that Tipitaka simply does not discuss. For example, there is not a 
single word about integral calculus or internal combustion engines. I 
don't think anyone would argue that these things are inconsistent with 
Tipitaka. Of course, these things don't have much to do with the 
Dhamma that Buddha taught. By the same token, Buddha himself said that 
what he could teach about Dhamma in the short span of 45 years 
amounted to no more than a handful of leaves in a forest full of 
trees. The commentaries fill in some of the blanks (like Buddhagosa's 
comments on bhaya-nana), but we are left to filling in the vast blanks 
with wisdom garnered from our own experiences (like Mahasi's 
pre-bhaya-nana description: "The mind itself is gripped by fear..."). 
It is important that we be sure our deviations--whether dealing with 
internal combustion or "pre-bhaya-nana"--are not inconsistent with 
Tipitaka, but we deviate from Tipitaka very frequently and necessarily 
so. If you disagree, that's fine, but I don't think you will find 
in the Tipitaka any contradiction to my point.

 
2815 From: Dan Dalthorp  <> 
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 1:12am
Subject: Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!"

 
  Dear Alex,
Thanks for the insightful post. I especially like your comment:

> A few weeks ago, he said that on the surface, perhaps even on the 
> intermediate level of understanding, Christianity and Buddhism  
appear the same, but on the higher level, they are completely 
different.  

I agree for the most part. However, I'd say that on a superficial 
level, they appear completely different. On a more intermediate level 
(once we get beyond the obvious differences in language and methods of 
expressing truth), they appear very similar. On a deeper level, 
though, they are once again very different. Part of the difference is 
that Christianity does not have a detailed description of the path. 
When pressed on what the path is, the response is that "faith is a 
gift from the Holy Spirit," which is quite a different from Buddha's 
[paraphrase of Rhys David's translation]: "Work out your own salvation 
with diligence"--and then explicit instructions on how to do it!

Another, less important but critical difference is the 
different emphasis on Jesus' two commandments: 1. Love God with all 
your heart; and 2. Love your neighbor as yourself. Theravada Buddhists 
put greater emphasis on the former (internal, spiritual), and 
Christianity puts more emphasis on the latter. Both traditions do 
emphasize both "commandments," but the weight put on each is 
different.

 
2816 From: Dan Dalthorp  <> 
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 1:19am
Subject: Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!"

 
  > I doubt that anyone who knows 'kammasakata' (each person having his 
> own kamma' would ask 'law of nature' to 'forgive' anyone, since 
> forgiveness is for the kusala citta of the person who forgives, 
> nothing to do with what the perpetrator of the kamma who must 
receive 
> the vipaka (result of kamma) whether anyone forgives him or not.  
Excellent point! I see two wholesome functions of asking the 
'law of nature' for 'forgiveness'. One is to generate compassion 
towards others. The other is to attentuate the tendency to roll 
in unproductive, akusala brooding about your own guilty feelings. 

>By 
> the way, there is an article on 'Kammasakata-nana', a great personal 
> favorite of mine, in the advance section of 
> <http://www.dhammastudy.com/>, which might be of interest.
I do hope to read it. [I keep thinking I don't have much time, but I 
keep posting on this board! It may be time to take a disciplined 
Holiday, following Robert's lead.]

 
2817 From: amara chay   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 1:28am
Subject: Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!"

 
  > > I doubt that anyone who knows 'kammasakata' (each person having 
his 
> > own kamma' would ask 'law of nature' to 'forgive' anyone, since 
> > forgiveness is for the kusala citta of the person who forgives, 
> > nothing to do with what the perpetrator of the kamma who must 
> receive 
> > the vipaka (result of kamma) whether anyone forgives him or not.  
> Excellent point! I see two wholesome functions of asking the 
> 'law of nature' for 'forgiveness'. One is to generate compassion 
> towards others. The other is to attentuate the tendency to roll 
> in unproductive, akusala brooding about your own guilty feelings. 


Dear Dan,

I think a Buddhist would be more interested in realities and wisdom 
rather than some god and even less in guilt.


> >By 
> > the way, there is an article on 'Kammasakata-nana', a great 
personal 
> > favorite of mine, in the advance section of 
> > <http://www.dhammastudy.com/>, which might be of interest.
> I do hope to read it. [I keep thinking I don't have much time, but I 
> keep posting on this board! It may be time to take a disciplined 
> Holiday, following Robert's lead.]


We shall miss you, as we do him.

Amara

 
 
2818 From: Dan Dalthorp  <> 
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 2:04am
Subject: Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!"

 
  Dear Amara,
I agree that the Buddhists are very concerned about "realities" and 
"wisdom". One aspect of wisdom is the generate compassion; another is 
to cultivate right effort to dissipate unwholesome thoughts about past 
actions. Properly done, forgiveness can accomplish this. Maybe 
'forgiveness' could be a cetasika in an alternative formulation of 
abhidhamma! [Really, I don't think this is worth thinking about for 
more than a moment or two because we already have a wonderful 
abhidhamma, and none of us has the wisdom to create another, even if 
it is possible!]

> > 'law of nature' for 'forgiveness'. One is to generate compassion 
> > towards others. The other is to attentuate the tendency to roll 
> > in unproductive, akusala brooding about your own guilty feelings. 

> I think a Buddhist would be more interested in realities and wisdom 
> rather than some god and even less in guilt.
> 
> 
> > >By 
> > > the way, there is an article on 'Kammasakata-nana', a great 
> personal 
> > > favorite of mine, in the advance section of 
> > > <http://www.dhammastudy.com/>, which might be of interest.
> > I do hope to read it. [I keep thinking I don't have much time, but 
I 
> > keep posting on this board! It may be time to take a disciplined 
> > Holiday, following Robert's lead.]
> 
> 
> We shall miss you, as we do him.
> 
> Amara

 
2819 From: amara chay   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 2:17am
Subject: Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!"

 
  > I agree that the Buddhists are very concerned about "realities" and 
> "wisdom". One aspect of wisdom is the generate compassion; another 
is 
> to cultivate right effort to dissipate unwholesome thoughts about 
past 
> actions. Properly done, forgiveness can accomplish this. Maybe 
> 'forgiveness' could be a cetasika in an alternative formulation of 
> abhidhamma! 


Dear Dan,

Forgiveness, abhaya in Pali, I think, litterally means a=no 
bhaya=harm, that is to say no harm is intended toward the person you 
forgive.  It is adosa, accompanied sometimes by metta or friendship 
and is kusala citta of course.  It is so described in the abhidhamma, 
as are all major citta and cetasika.

Well, thanks for your interesting posts, I will have to go now, see 
you tomorrow, I hope,

Amara

 
2820 From: Kom Tukovinit   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 2:19am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!"

 
  Hi Dan,

From the sila stand point, I think Buddhism looks similar to other
religions at the most superficial level.  Beyond that there aren't many
similarities.   from a non-specific standpoint, all Buddha teachings
are beautiful at the beginning, beautiful in the middle, and beautiful
at the end.  His teachings are profound refined, and his panna about
realities is unmatched.  I can't certainly say the same thing about
other religions.

In the more specific standpoints, here's what I found:
1) Sila in Buddhism has many levels: from sila without panna, sila with
panna, sila with Satipatthana, and sila with maggha.  Now, if you have
sila because it's the will/teaching of god.  Is that Sila with or
without panna?

2) People with different levels of panna perform sila for different
purposes: because it's good, because it will bring you good things in
return, or because it contributes to the path to Nibhanna.  In
Christianity, isn't it true that even if you perform sila, the result
is still uncertain.  It depends on god to make the judgement whether or
not you are worthy.  The results of sila are subjective at best, but
the results of sila in Buddhism are certain: it is simply how things
work.

--- Dan Dalthorp <> wrote:
> I agree for the most part. However, I'd say that on a superficial 
> level, they appear completely different. On a more intermediate level
> 
> (once we get beyond the obvious differences in language and methods
> of 
> expressing truth), they appear very similar. On a deeper level, 
> though, they are once again very different. 
I would love to hear more specific details of why you say this. 
Exception for the wordings and the outside appearances of person
performign sila (not killing, not lying, etc.), I see no similarity.  

> Part of the difference is
> 
> that Christianity does not have a detailed description of the path. 
> When pressed on what the path is, the response is that "faith is a 
> gift from the Holy Spirit," which is quite a different from Buddha's 
> [paraphrase of Rhys David's translation]: "Work out your own
> salvation 
> with diligence"--and then explicit instructions on how to do it!
The Buddha teaches realities as things really are.  I see huge
differences between Buddhism and other religion, betwen truths and
non-truths.  What are the similarities?

> 
> Another, less important but critical difference is the 
> different emphasis on Jesus' two commandments: 1. Love God with all 
> your heart; and 2. Love your neighbor as yourself. Theravada
> Buddhists 
> put greater emphasis on the former (internal, spiritual), and 
> Christianity puts more emphasis on the latter. Both traditions do 
> emphasize both "commandments," but the weight put on each is 
> different.
I also don't see how you say the first view point is a Buddhist view
point?  That's certainly not matching any of the Buddha's teachings,
perhaps not even matching to the teachings by Mahasi!  There is no god:
it's not a person, and it's not animal: there can be no Metta toward
god.  

kom




 
2821  
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 2:24am
Subject: Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!"

 
  Dear Dan,

   I think that the main point is not about the differences and 
similarities between religions.  BTW, I cannot think of Buddhism as a 
religion.  I believe that Buddhism is a study, similar to physics, 
biology,... with the Buddha as the Supreme Teacher, teaching us how 
to get out of suffering by showing us realities and concepts.  I 
cannot say the same thing about other religions such as Christianity 
though.

   We appreciate the Buddha and His Teachings according to our 
accumulations.  Some of us appreciate the Buddha and his Teachings so 
well that they are Sotapannas or higher.  Some of us are walking half 
way on the Path, with deep appreciation of other teachings as well.  
Some of us even follow cults whole heartedly.  We all do our best in 
our current ability and understanding to advance ourselves.  We 
cannot realize our wrong view easily because of our avijja 
(ignorance).  Only with right view and wisdom, we can really 
distinguish what is right and what is wrong.

   I always remind my students at my temple that Buddhism is the 
Teachings of Loving-Kindness and Wisdom.  

   That's why I rely on the Suttas such as the Kalama, the Brahmajala 
as well as other "reliable" sources to judge if whatever I hear is in 
harmony with the Buddha's Teachings or not.  

   Please forgive me if I offend you or some of our members in the 
list.

Anumodana,
Alex Tran

 
2822 From: m. nease   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 5:24am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: sitting "vs" non-sitting; vitakka, vicara and samatha, pannati and paramattha dhammas

 
  Dear Jonothan,

--- Jonothan Abbott  wrote:

> I am glad you found it useful

Much more than useful.  I do think it contains the
answer to both the 'vs.' and the 'robes' issue.  The
more I reflect on it, the clearer these issues seem.

> I agree it needs references (and further working
> on). 
> The idea was to collect references as I came across
> them for later inclusion.  Hasn't happened, I'm
> afraid.  Any suggestions from any direction
> gratefully
> received.

I'm just thinking that a sceptic would be likely to
ask for provenance--I'm afraid I wouldn't know where
to begin to look.

> PS  I'm impressed at your organizational skills as
> reflected in your folder system.  I would be
> interested to know how you get text from your email
> program to your hard drive - by copy and paste, or
> as
> an actual file?  I haven't worked out a satisfactory
> system yet!

Actually, I'm much to stingy of space on my hard
drive--I keep these 'folders' on Yahoo's server. 
While you have a message open, there's a little window
in the upper right corner of you screen reading,
'Choose Folder'.  If you select 'New Folder' from that
list, then click on 'Move', you'll be prompted for a
name for the new 'folder'.  Once you've filled that
in, the message will be saved in that folder
indefinitely.  After that, you can click on the '+'
sign next to 'Folders' (to the left of your message
window), and select the 'folder' you'd like to view.

Hope this is of some use!

mike    


 
2823  
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 5:33am
Subject: Re: sitting "vs" non-sitting; vitakka, vicara and samatha, pannati and paramattha dhammas

 
  ---  "m. nease"  wrote:
> > PS  I'm impressed at your organizational skills as
> > reflected in your folder system.  
> 
> Actually, I'm much to stingy of space on my hard
> drive--I keep these 'folders' on Yahoo's server. 
> While you have a message open, there's a little window
> in the upper right corner of you screen reading,
> 'Choose Folder'.  If you select 'New Folder' from that
> list, then click on 'Move', you'll be prompted for a
> name for the new 'folder'.  Once you've filled that
> in, the message will be saved in that folder
> indefinitely.  After that, you can click on the '+'
> sign next to 'Folders' (to the left of your message
> window), and select the 'folder' you'd like to view.
> 
> Hope this is of some use!
> 
> mike    

Dear Jonothan and Mike,

   Good Question, Good Answer!

Thank you,
Alex

 
2824  
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 5:40am
Subject: Re: sitting "vs" non-sitting; vitakka, vicara and samatha, pannati and paramatth

 
  ---  "m. nease"  wrote:

> Thanks for bringing up this important point.  I've
> only just recently read about it in Abhidhamma in
> Daily Life.  This surely requires more understanding
> on my part.

Dear Mike,

   On which page that you found this information in the ADL, may I 
ask?  I haven't started reading the ADL yet.

   Like Robert and Amara said, even if we are born with 3 hetus, we 
may not realize it for years, or even for lives in the future.  
Moreover, it's very easy to make a mistake and be lost in wrong 
view.  It all depends on accumulations and conditions.

   A few months ago, when browsing the archive, I discovered that the 
list also discuss about the hetus.  

With Metta,
AT

 
2825 From: m. nease   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 6:26am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: sitting "vs" non-sitting; vitakka, vicara and samatha, pannati and paramatth

 
  Dear Alex,

---  wrote:

>    On which page that you found this information in
> the ADL, may I 
> ask?  I haven't started reading the ADL yet.

I think the discussion of hetus begins earlier in the
book than this, but I was thinking of Chapter 8,
'Ahetuka Cittas'--which doesn't really deal with this
particular issue, as I recall.

So, not sure where the first mention of hetus begins! 
A great book, though, hope you enjoy it...

mike 


 
2826 From: m. nease   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 10:53am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] perception/memory, consciousness

 
  Just thinking aloud--could the flaw in translation be
that of cognition vs. REcognition?

--- Robert Kirkpatrick
 wrote:
> Dear amara,
> See my comments below:
> --- amara chay  wrote:
> > 
> > > Visuddhimagga XIV3 "the state of knowing is
> equally present
> > in
> > > perception(sanna) in consciousness
> (vinnana)(synonym for
> > citta)
> > > and in panna. Nevertheless perception is only
> the mere
> > > perceiving of an object as, say,'blue' or
> 'yellow';it cannot
> > > bring about the penetration of its
> characteristics as
> > > impermanent painful and not-self. Consciousness
> knows the
> > > objects as blue or yellow, and it brings about
> the
> > penetration
> > > of its characteristics, but it cannot bring
> about by
> > > endeavouring, the manifestation of the path.
> Panna knows the
> > > object in the way already stated, it brings
> about the
> > > penetration of the characteristics and it brings
> about, by
> > > endeavoring, the manifestation of the path"
> > 
> > 
> > This explains 'the state of knowing' very clearly.
>  Except for
> > the 
> > translation of perception as '(sanna)', which
> whomever did the
> > 
> > translation did not specify that 'sanna' is memory
> and
> > therefore 
> > cognition, as in recognition.  
> 
> Could you give us the Thai version (translated);
> this may be an
> important error in the English as usually sanna is
> translated as
> perception. They do exlain also that it has the
> function of
> memory but this is not stressed usually by
> translators. I would
> love to know more about this.
> 
> 
> > 
> > Otherwise this is a good differentiation of panna
> as right 
> > understanding from common memory and knowledge;
> and
> > experiencing daily 
> > life from moments when panna arises.
> 
> Glad you approve. 
> 
> > 
> > Who did the translation, by the way?
> 
> Venerable nanamoli an English monk who lived in sri
> lanka.
> 
> 
> On your last post you wrote:
> ">>From the 'Summary', the citta is explained more
> as an
> intelligence 
> than a consciousness since it arises when one is
> alive, even in
> a coma 
> or deep sleep, as the bhavanga citta (or life
> continuum)." >>>
> 
> I see in your  translation of Summary of Paramattha
> Dhammas by
> Khun sujin that you you translate Citta as
> consciousness not
> intelligence:
> 
> >>>... with the power of a dhamma, it is citta. 
> This
> demonstrates the importance of citta, which is
> consciousness,
> which experiences and knows, which is eminent in
> experiencing
> whatever appears>>>>
> 
> Also the glossary on your web page has this
> definition for
> >>>>>>citta:  
> consciousness, the reality which knows, or cognizes
> an object.
> >>>>
> 
> Robert
>  



 
2827 From: m. nease   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 11:03am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Vipassana meditation

 
  Dear Robert,

For a guy on holiday, this is some pretty heavy work. 
I don't mean to be flippant--there's a tremendous
amount to consider here.

Thanks...

mike


 
2828 From: m. nease   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 11:04am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Precepts - Intoxicants

 
  Thanks and well said, sir...

mike

--- Jonothan Abbott  wrote:
> Dear All
> 
> Some time ago there was discussion here about the
> reason for the inclusion of the avoidance of
> intoxicants in the 5 precepts.
> 
> Recently I came across an old BPS Newsletter with an
> article by Bhikkhu Bodhi on the subject of sobriety.
> 
> In it he explains the reason for the laying down of
> the precept.  He says-
> 
> To dispel any doubt about his reasons for
> prescribing
> this precept, the Buddha has written the explanation
> into the rule itself:  one is to refrain from the
> use
> of intoxicating drinks and drugs because they are
> the
> cause of heedlessness (pamaada).  Heedlessness means
> moral recklessness, disregard for the bounds between
> right and wrong.  It is the loss of heedfulness
> (appamaada), moral scrupulousness based on a keen
> perception of the dangers in unwholesome states. …
> [ends]
> 
> Bh Bodhi goes on to say that to indulge in
> intoxicating drinks is to risk falling away from
> each
> of the 3 stages of the path – morality,
> concentration
> and wisdom [ie sila, samadhi and panna].
> 
> If anyone comes across any actual Tipitaka
> references,
> please share with us.
> 
> By the way, I believe that ‘moral recklessness,
> disregard for the bounds between right and wrong’ in
> the passage quoted above is a reference to the
> absence
> of the cetasikas (mental factors) hiri and ottappa,
> which have been the subject of discussion recently.
> 
> Jonothan
> 



 
2829 From: amara chay   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 11:06am
Subject: Re: perception/memory, consciousness

 
  > Just thinking aloud--could the flaw in translation be
> that of cognition vs. REcognition?


Dear Mike,

You mean that cognition is to learn something new, as opposed to 
recognition as to knowing what is seen intellectually?

Amara

P.S.  I forgot to ask, where is the flaw, do you mean in my 
translation?  Because if you find something wrong, it could be easily 
rectified.

 
2830 From: m. nease   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 11:21am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sitting "vs" non-sitting; vitakka, vicara and samatha, pannati and paramattha dhammas

 
  Dear Jonothan,

--- Jonothan Abbott  wrote:

> Kom
> 
> I have a slightly different understanding on this
> subject than Robert (Mike, but there is no discord
> between us!), 

(Genuine thanks for the reassurance, but 'I' seem to
have overcome clinging to concord, for the moment...!)

> and I hope you don't mind if I give my
> thoughts here.

I don't think that could ever be the case (for long,
at least...!)
 
> >  wrote:

> > >  Almost always breath is concept when we are
> aware
> > of it.
> > > Especially when it is used as an object for
> > samattha and a
> > > nimitta arises this is obviously concept. 
> > You are saying here that in the beginning, the
> > meditator (samatha
> > bhavana) may have poramattha as aramana.  However,
> > since to develop the
> > samatha bhanvana further, nimita must appear, and
> > therefore, at this
> > point, it becomes pannati.  Is this about right?
> 
> Breath, it seems to me, is a concept.  Like with the
> concept ‘body’, it is possible that there can be
> awareness of one of the realities that we normally
> take for breath/body, and at such moments no concept
> of breath/body appears.  But there is no paramattha
> dhamma ‘breath’, just as there is no paramattha
> dhamma
> ‘body’.

I was instructed, for this reason, to focus on 'the
rise and fall of the abdomen', rather than the breath
at the tip of the nose.  The rationale was that, if
one focused on the sensation of the breath at the tip
of the nose, one's attention might be taken instead by
the wind element, or the fire (coolness?) element, or
the wind (motion?) element--so, better to focus on the
"rise and fall of the abdomen"--which I'm now certain
is paññati, at best--as least the way *I* did it...
 
> Breath as object of samatha is a concept.  Breath as
> object of satipatthana, however, is a reference to
> awareness of one of the realities that we take for
> breath.

Do you think that this was what, specifically, was
meant in the Anapanasati Sutta?
 
> > > And even during
> > > vipassana when there is awareness of the
> different
> > namas and
> > > rupas that arise almost simultaneoulsy with
> breath
> > - the breath
> > > itself is not an object for satipatthana.
> However
> > breath is
> > > actually composed of rupas that are conditioned
> > ONLY by citta
> > > (citta-samutthana-rupa). Only special type of
> > wisdom can
> > > actually distinguish between the rupas that are
> > citta-samutthana
> > > -rupa and say those that are utu
> -samutthana-rupa.
> >  Thus we might
> > > think we are experiencing the rupas that are
> > conditioned by
> > > citta but actually be observing other types - it
> > is exceedingly
> > > hard to know. 
> > Do you know of anyone who actually try to
> "observe"
> > the differences
> > between citta-samutthana and utu-samutthana rupa? 
> > Are the differences
> > actually observable via Satipatthana?  This is
> where
> > I can understand
> > how being unwise studying Abhidhamma could cause
> > insanity...
> 
> I think what Robert is saying here is that one
> reason
> why samatha bhavana with breath as object is so
> difficult is that it is easy to take what is not
> breath for breath, since there are all sorts of
> things
> happening around the tip of the nose.  

Sure--or the abdomen...

> Knowledge of
> the difference between the 2 kinds of rupa
> (conditioned by citta vs. conditioned by utu) would
> be
> panna of the level of samatha bhavana, I suppose.
> 
> The difference between these 2 kinds of rupa is of
> no
> significance in the development of satipatthana,
> since
> satipatthana does not require the arising of
> awareness
> in relation to any particular reality.  

But doesn't satipaññaa require the arising of
awareness in relation to a paramattha dhamma?  I was
beginning to think that this is the difference between
paramattha and non-paramattha dhammas (e.g. paññati)
...  

> And as far
> as
> I know, the characteristic of, say, hardness, is the
> same whenever it appears to sati ie it does not
> differ
> according to its conditioning factor/s.
> 
> This is a very complex area.  I have only ever tried
> to understand the basics, because these are
> confusing
> enough!

Tell me about it...!

mike


 
2831 From: m. nease   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 11:36am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Abhidhamma - Then & now

 
  Dear Jonothan,

--- Jonothan Abbott  wrote:

> > O.K.  But isn't an affinity for impermanence and
> the
> > other characterisics, one of the things that
> > attracts
> > us to the Dhamma now?
> 
> Yes.  But our 'affinity for impermanence' is at a
> relatively superficial level.  It is not the panna
> which experiences, for example, seeing as seeing and
> at the same time has penetrated the true nature of
> that reality to the degree that the characteristic
> of
> impermanence is known.

I guess what I had in mind here was, If 'we' have an
affinity for the tilakkhana now, doesn't that suggest
some previous 'accumulation'?  If it's true that we
don't carry 'stories' from one life to the next, but
only paññaa?  Or is this just sankharuppadana (or
something like that)?
 
> For those listening to the Buddha, developed panna
> was
> arising through the different doorways as he spoke. 
> They had accumulated levels of panna in previous
> lives, 

Have we not?  If not, why are we interested today?

> and had me the right conditions for those
> accumulations to become manifest during the lifetime
> of the Buddha. 
> I appreciate that there are many people today who
> claim to understand impermanence, 

I promise you, I make no claim to this!  I only wonder
why some of us are attracted by the tilakkhana in this
life, while most of us (even if we hear of it) are
repulsed.  Maybe I'm just being a little superstitious
here...

> but they do so
> without having studied the realities appearing
> through
> the different doorways.  So I believe they are
> talking
> about something different.

I'm sure that's true.

mike


 
2832 From: m. nease   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 11:45am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re:_Papañca_[again]

 
  Dear Khun Sujin,

--- amara chay  wrote:

> But the nama sati and panna, as
> you also observed, 
> could study the characteristics of other nama, when
> they arise 
> strongly enough, the ones being as fast as the
> other.  The thing is 
> not to attach so much importance to the individual
> moments so as to 
> keep thinking about this and that aspect of it
> afterwards, not 
> realizing they are just thoughts.  

Right!

> Moments of sati
> arise to know the 
> paramatthadhamma with the right conditions, 

Nama AND rupa...

> for just
> that fleeting 
> instant when one reality appears at a time, not the
> whole body or a 
> hand which are concepts, but as visible object,
> touch, seeing, which 
> you can test for yourself even in front of the
> computer.  

...or paññaa can...

> Khun Sujin 
> says that right understanding can arise anywhere,
> without exception, 
> so all we have to do is let it happen, 

...and hope for kusala 'accumulations'...

> no matter
> what others say.  
> Only we could know our own experiences, in the end. 
> 
> 
> Anumodana in your studies, as usual,

Thanks, as always, Ma'am...

mike


 
 
2833 From: Jim Anderson   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 11:44am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Friends, Robes & Terminology

 
  Dear Sarah,

You wrote:
>I had 2 older Abhidhamatthasangaha translations & had
>also found it tough going. The translation by B.Bodhi
>I find a real treat by comparison; beautifully laid
>out and in good English w/gd notes. But then you're
>probably reading it in Pali. do you have the comm.note
>in Pali too?

The 2 older translations of Abhidh-s (CPD abbr.) you mention are
probably the same 2 I have by Narada and S.Z. Aung. I don't have Bodhi's
translation but have been thinking about ordering a copy. I most often use
Narada's translation and notes but only for reference and have not tried to
work my way through it from cover to cover. However, the Abhidh-s does
contain a lot of useful information that helps me to understand some of the
messages on this list. Some recent examples were those concerning the hetus
of individuals which Alex and Amara posted and also in my reading of
'Realities and Concepts' there is much in it that is coming from Abhidh-s
and its tika. So I'm interested in becoming better acquainted with these
texts in Pali. I have four versions of Abhidh-s and two versions of its tika
to work with plus the two translations mentioned above.

>Good to have you back on 'board'...you certainly
>caught up quickly!

Glad to be back on board! Normally, whenever I leave my cottage I also leave
behind my access to the internet and I would have quite a bit of catching up
to do when I got back. But this time while in the city I bought a laptop
computer and was able to connect online from it while there and keep up with
reading the messages. I also felt that it was a good idea to have a laptop
as a backup in case my desktop computer fails to work as it did several
times last year.

Best wishes,
Jim A.

 
2834 From: amara chay   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 11:51am
Subject: Re:_Papañca_[again]

 
  > Dear Khun Sujin,


Dear Mike,

I hope this was an 'honest mistake' and not irony!

Sorry, just couldn't resist,

Amara

 
2835 From: m. nease   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 0:01pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Friends, Robes & Terminology

 
  Dear Sarah,

--- Sarah Procter Abbott 
wrote:

> So what is meant by 'holy life' and what is meant
> here
> by 'monk'? 

I knew I was equivocating a little, here, and
deliberately so.  No wrong speech was intended...

> I'd need to read the commentary notes to
> be
> quite sure, but in many suttas, we are told that the
> holy life refers to the eightfold path and those who
> have followed the eightfold path (and reached stages
> of enlightenment) are those that have followed the
> holy life. This reminds me of the ultimate meaning
> of
> sangha which also refers to the same individuals.

This WAS the sort of think I had in mind...
 
> In the same way, we need to consider what is meant
> by
> 'bhikkhu' when it seems so often that it is only
> monks
> that are being referred to. I'm just looking at the
> commentary notes to the Satipatthana Sutta. Here it
> says 'Bhikkhu is a term to indicate a person who
> earnestly endeavours to accomplish the practice of
> the
> teaching. Others, gods and men, too, certainly
> strive
> earnestly to accomplish the practice of the
> teaching,
> but because of the excellence of the bhikkhu-state
> by
> way of prctice, the master said 'Bhikkhu'....'He who
> practises this practice of the Arousing of
> Mindfulness
> is called a bhikkhu'....'Accordingly it is said:
> 
>     "Well-dressed one may be, but if one is calm,
>      Tamed, humble,pure,a man who does no harm
>      To aught that lives, that one's a brahmin true.
>      An ascetic and mendicant too'Dhp142

Nice citation! Especially in the context of the
'robes' thread.  As you may recall, I have yet to read
the commentaries--so you may be engaging in a duel of
wits with an unarmed opponent...
 
> In the comm notes to the Samannaphala Sutta (Fruit
> of
> recluseship) 

(one of my favorites!)

> which I'm reading along with many other
> books, in my grasshopper fashion, it talks about the
> meaning of recluseship:
> 
> 'in the ultimate sense, recluseship is the path and
> the fruit of recluseship is the noble fruit.  As it
> is
> said:  'What , bhikhus, is recluseship? It is this
> Noble Eightfold Path...' '
> 
> It also talks here about the 3 kinds of solitude,
> i.e.
> bodily (kayaviveka), mental (cittaviveka) and
> ultimate
> solitude (upadhiviveka) for those  persons 'who have
> gone beyone formations' (i.e. attained Nibbana).
> 
> The reason I'm mentioning these is not because
> anyone
> has implied anything to the contrary but just to
> reflect how carefully we need to read the Suttas.
> When
> it seems that the Buddha is only talking to the
> monks,
> it MAY not be the case.

Sarah, I'm NOT disagreeing with you.  But the
distinction comes not from reading the suttas, but
from reading the commentaries.  I hope you know that,
by now, I'm convinced of the value of that.
 
> Even with commentary notes and the Pali it is not
> always easy and the reading will very much depend on
> one's understanding at the time. Ages(?) ago there
> was
> some discussion on the list (after a death in O's
> family) on the Bhaddekaratta Sutta (A Single
> Excellent
> Night), Maj Nik 131.  It talks about how death can
> come at any time, but one who 'dwells' ardently can
> be
> said to have had an excellent night. I'd read all
> the
> comm notes and checked the pali and still didn't
> understand why it should just refer to the night and
> not the day. In Bangkok they checked the Thai and
> here
> it referred to night and day and K.Sujin explained
> that night refers to a 24hr period as in booking a
> hotel for 2nts!  

Not surprising at all.  Same expression is common
around the ancient world, in the form of 'moons'
rather than 'suns'.

> I don't expect this to be of any
> interest to many (except perhaps Jim A), but it's
> just
> an example of how suttas are not as easy to read as
> some may think and a reason why it can be hard to
> read
> correctly without some knowledge of abhidhamma!

Well, it's of great interest to me, in particular, but
more to the point, as an example of the value of
approaching the dhammavinaya by way of the
commentaries, and therefore of the great benefit of
having the members of this group as 'admirable
friends... 
 
Happy New Year again...

mike


 
2836 From: m. nease   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 0:10pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Vedana associated with contemplating anatta

 
  Dear Sarah,

--- Sarah Procter Abbott 
wrote:

> On the subject of concord or lack of it (Mike this
> post may not be to your liking in this regard!),

(I think I'm beginning to get over this particular
bug, thanks to you...!)
 
> p.s (I always seem to have one) Mike, some humour
> and
> lighter side would have been a big improvement all
> around at that time!

Unfortunately, I was engaged in an underwater struggle
with a HUGE papañca-beast at the time.  If you hadn't
thrown me that knife, I wouldn't be here to thank you
even now...  
 
mike


 
2837 From: m. nease   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 0:19pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re:_Papañca_[again]

 
  I've done it again...

No irony intended, Khun Amara!

mike
--- amara chay  wrote:
> 
> > Dear Khun Sujin,
> 
> 
> Dear Mike,
> 
> I hope this was an 'honest mistake' and not irony!
> 
> Sorry, just couldn't resist,
> 
> Amara
> 
> 



 
2838 From: m. nease   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 0:33pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re:New year resolution

 
  Dear Khun Shin,

Well said!

--- shinlin  wrote:
> Dear Dhamma friends,
>     It is already New Years. Usually before meeting
> and hearing dhamma, I
> would usually think of new year resolutions for the
> next year. BUT things
> has changed after understanding the dhamma. At the
> beginning, I thought
> Dhamma would change my life for the better. BUT all
> that was the wrong view
> of learning dhamma. I have realized that learning
> the dhamma is not
> expecting or wanting for a change but understanding
> the truth of everything
> and realities, which enhance the understanding of
> anattaness of everything
> and development of the right view. Lately, Archan
> Sujin taught us how to
> really understand and contemplate the realities as
> it is. And from there, I
> have realized that I have been only understanding
> dhamma at the level of
> thinking, and not the real contemplating and
> understanding of realities.

Ditto!  It struck me recently that I've expended a
great deal of (wrong) effort trying to justify a lot
of 'coarse' understanding based on paññati (mostly
papañca). 

> From these past lessons, I have realized that many
> of our dhamma friends are
> in the same situation as me. 

(Count me 'in').

> Therefore today, I have
> decided on advising
> everyone my misunderstanding of dhamma, in hoping
> this can allow you to
> ponder yourself whether if it is really
> understanding the realities or you
> think you understand the realities. This is very
> important because thinking
> that you understand, includes a big self in there. I
> am not here to attack
> anybody or cause any akusula citta for anyone, and
> if my letter has attack
> any of you, pls forgive me because my intentions are
> not to offend you in
> any ways.

On the contrary, Ma'am, THANK you for 'attacking' 'my'
moha! and a very happy new year...

mike


 
2839 From: m. nease   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 0:52pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: perception/memory, consciousness

 
  Dear Khun Amara,

--- amara chay  wrote:
 
> > Just thinking aloud--could the flaw in translation
> be
> > that of cognition vs. REcognition?
>  
> Dear Mike,
> 
> You mean that cognition is to learn something new,
> as opposed to 
> recognition as to knowing what is seen
> intellectually?

I meant to 'know' it for the first time rather than to
perceive it as something previously known.  I was
really just throwing that out as a possibility.
 
> Amara
> 
> P.S.  I forgot to ask, where is the flaw, do you
> mean in my 
> translation?  

No, that wasn't what I meant.  I should have kept more
of the post I was responding to--I'll look it up and
refresh my memory.

> Because if you find something wrong,
> it could be easily 
> rectified.

I certainly didn't to criticise your translation.  I
don't know the original language!  Please excuse my
recklessness.  I've been going a little too fast,
trying to catch up--I'll have a look back and try to
clarify my meaning.

No offense, Ma'am!

mike


 
2840 From: amara chay   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 1:07pm
Subject: Re: perception/memory, consciousness

 
  > I meant to 'know' it for the first time rather than to
> perceive it as something previously known.  


Dear Mike,

Both the words 'cognition' and 'recognition' are the functions of 
sanna, if I remember correctly, sanna 'marks' or 'notes' whatever the 
citta is experiencing as aramana so that it recognizes it again, even 
when it could not place a 'name' on it yet, such as in a baby without 
linguistic abilities.  The which is why right sanna of the 
experiencing of realities could accumulate and panna grow, mutually 
assisting one cetasika the other, with the right conditions.  

Hope this helps,

Amara

 
> No offense, Ma'am!
> 
> mike

 
2841 From: amara chay   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 1:10pm
Subject: Re: perception/memory, consciousness

 
  > > No offense, Ma'am!
> > 
> > mike


Dear Mike,

I meant to say also, no offense taken, especially from you!

Amara

 
2842 From: amara chay   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 1:31pm
Subject: Re: perception/memory, consciousness

 
  > Both the words 'cognition' and 'recognition' are the functions of 
> sanna, if I remember correctly, sanna 'marks' or 'notes' whatever 
the 
> citta is experiencing as aramana so that it recognizes it again, 
even 
> when it could not place a 'name' on it yet, such as in a baby 
without 
> linguistic abilities.  The which is why right sanna of the 
> experiencing of realities could accumulate and panna grow, mutually 
> assisting one cetasika the other, with the right conditions.  


I also would like to add that this is why the 'wrong' sanna is also 
accumulated in ordinary everyday life, when we take nama and rupa 
for  the self and others as well as animals, entities and objects.  
Without the teachings of the Buddha, right sanna would never be able 
to start, even on the intellectual level, and we would always live in 
the world of pannatti, as we have for innumerable lifetimes.

Amara

 
2843 From: m. nease   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 1:43pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: perception/memory, consciousness

 
  Dear Khun Amara,

--- amara chay  wrote:

> > I meant to 'know' it for the first time rather
> than to
> > perceive it as something previously known.  

> Dear Mike,
> 
> Both the words 'cognition' and 'recognition' are the
> functions of 
> sanna, if I remember correctly, sanna 'marks' or
> 'notes' whatever the 
> citta is experiencing as aramana so that it
> recognizes it again, even 
> when it could not place a 'name' on it yet, such as
> in a baby without 
> linguistic abilities.  The which is why right sanna
> of the 
> experiencing of realities could accumulate and panna
> grow, mutually 
> assisting one cetasika the other, with the right
> conditions.  
> 
> Hope this helps,
> 
> Amara

Excellent!  Thanks for the clarification.

mike


 
2844 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 1:54pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Vedana associated with contemplating anatta

 
  --- Jonothan Abbott  wrote: >
I'd just like to chip in here with a comment on one
> of
> the references to 'fear' quoted by Sarah.
> 
> > Just one more short quote from Ang Nik bk of 6s:
> > 
> > 'Fear (bhaya), pain, disease, blain (?), bondage,
> > bog
> > (?) are names
> > For sense-desires to which the worldlings cling.
> > They who see fear in grasping (upadana)- source of
> > birth
> > And death - grasp not and, ending both, are freed;
> > Won is the peace, blissful in perfect cool
> > They dwell here now, all fear and hate long gone,
> > All ill surpassed.'
> 
> Good quote.  Is it possible that the reference to
> 'those who see fear in grasping (upadana)' is a
> reference to seeing fear without experiencing fear
> of
> the dosa type?
> 
> Jonothan
> 
Dear J,

Yes I think you're right. Both the first fear
(bhaya)in the first line and the fear as in see fear
in grasping (upadana- Comy. the fourfold-i.e.
kama,ditthi, silabbata, attavada) obviously refer to
the 'fearsomeness' in sense pleasures and grasping.
Those who see this dwell with all fear and hate (both
are kinds of dosa) removed.

Thanks for pointing this out. I've found the many
reminders about the fear or fearsomeness of sense
pleasures to be very sobering and useful (even if at
an intellectual level!). Thanks to Amara & Dan for
raising the topic. <would be nice to have a better
translation for bhaya!>

Sarah

Really looking f/w to a good translation of Ang Nik
w/comm notes by B.Bodhi.....! The collected Wheel
publication didn't include this verse.


 
2845 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 3:11pm
Subject: Giving and Taking Offence

 
  Dear Kom, Amara, Alex, Shin, Mike 

Kom wrote:
> I am glad to see you don't seem to take offense to
> labeling subjective.
>   I think all each of us can do is to explain our
> understanding in the
> open, and point out to each other good sources of
> information.  Whether
> one who reads the messages understand dhamma the
> right way or not, that
> depends on many conditions and accumulations. 

I think we've all been concerned about giving offence
recently and perhaps it's useful to consider this a
little.

As we know, those cheating dhammas (vancaka) slip in
all the time and the reason they're cheating is
because we usually don't recognize them because we're
so busy justifying our kusala (wholesome) thoughts,
speech and action. Amara referred recently to a couple
of these. One was the condemning with harsh words,
focusing on the person and not the deed (no.21). I am
only too painfully aware of how often this slips in
while I'm teaching. It's so easy to justify the stern
words (and dosa) as being for the student's welfare.

The other Amara mentioned was the one that 'searches
for others' wrong doings' and liking to 'condemn
others'. Again, it can be quite subtle and it's very
easy to kid ourselves that it doesn't arise. 

In reality, I find, even when my overall concern is to
help others such as when I am teaching or even here on
the list, akusala cittas of all kinds slip in all the
time. After all, teachers and listies are not arahats!


Amara & Dan have recently been sharing some useful
thought on 'judging others' and while I was checking
back in the Bk of 6s in Ang Nik for my last post, I
was side-tracked into reading the useful passages 'on
being considerate' and 'judging others'. 

In 'judging others' (bk of 6s, 45), the Buddha
discusses different types of persons. He starts by
talking about one who is pleasant, friendly and lives
gladly with others, but doesn't develop much
understanding. Then he talks about another person with
the same personality, but in this case becomes
enlightened. When they die, people judge them the same
and only the Buddha can know all the differences:

'Therefore, Ananda, you should not be a (hasty) critic
of people, should not (lightly) pass judgement on
people.  He who passes judgement on people harms
himself.  I alone, Ananda, or one like me, can judge
people.'

I've rather lost my thread... The point is, as Kom
expressed a lot more succinctly, all we can do on the
list (as that was the topic of his post) is offer our
help and understanding and even questioning as best as
we can at any given time, keeping in mind our
limitations. We cannot always send a perfect post or
one that won't cause offence, but at least we're
trying and learning, hopefully, by our mistakes. No
one means to cause offence.

Whether offence is taken will depend on many other
conditions which are quite outside our control. Some
were offended by even the Buddha's own words. While we
cling to ourselves, don't we all take offence from
time to time? Mana (conceit) rears its ugly head only
too easily!

> 
> Mispellings of pali terms, for examples, are
> understandably a hindrance
> to understanding the discussions.  Clearly akusala
> vipaka for those who
> endure them, and possibly akusala kamma for those
> who propagate them. 
> My apology to all.

I wouldn't put it so seriously, Kom... I really
wouldn't see this as akusala kamma for a start! The
vipaka will have to wait for another post!
What about all my typo mistakes? 
> 
> Misunderstood statements about dhamma are also an
> even harder hindrance
> to overcome.  I personally propagate some recently,
> and will no doubt
> propagate more (maybe less and less???) in the
> future. 

We ALL make mistakes..we're all here to learn...As
always, appreciating all your great posts this
month..Many times we discussed how we were sorry not
to have you with us in Cambodia.  

With (mostly) good intentions!!

Sarah


 
2846 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 3:26pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re:_Papañca_[again]

 
  Dear Amara,

Glad you enjoyed it....I've never been good at telling
amusing stories, so I'm flattered (o.k. there's the
mana) by your laughter! 

One little more twist to this story. Yesterday morning
I went to see my acupuncturist for my weekly 'hit'
with the needles for my throat problem. He suggested I
take up early morning chanting! When I remember the
words of the mantra, maybe I can try to juggle it with
my early morning posts to this list! 

Sarah



--- amara chay  wrote: > 

> Dear Sarah,
> 
> Thanks for this lovely explanation!  I really needed
> all that 
> laughter, (I know, lobha!) and now I also know what
> 'mantra' is to a 
> westerner!  Did you know that the recitals I used to
> do in my young 
> and obedient days were called in Thai 'suad mon'
> (reciting mantra) 
> which is why to my mind they are sort of synonyms.
> 
> Thanks for everything,
> 
> Amara
> 



 
2847 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 3:42pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re:_Papañca_[again]

 
  --- Sarah Procter Abbott 
wrote: > Dear Amara,
> 
 When I remember the
> words of the mantra, maybe I can try to juggle it
> with
> my early morning posts to this list!

..and with sati OF COURSE!


..and right now i'm juggling this, with a quick lunch
snack, & answering tel calls! MUST sign off!

> 
> Sarah
> 
> 
> 
> --- amara chay  wrote: > 
> 
> > Dear Sarah,
> > 
> > Thanks for this lovely explanation!  I really
> needed
> > all that 
> > laughter, (I know, lobha!) and now I also know
> what
> > 'mantra' is to a 
> > westerner!  Did you know that the recitals I used
> to
> > do in my young 
> > and obedient days were called in Thai 'suad mon'
> > (reciting mantra) 
> > which is why to my mind they are sort of synonyms.
> > 
> > Thanks for everything,
> > 
> > Amara
> > 



 
 
2848 From: tikmok   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 4:08pm
Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Giving and Taking Offence

 
  Dear Sarah,

Thanks for your well thought-out reponse to my message, and thanks for
attempting to mend any rift.

-----Original Message-----
> Mispellings of pali terms, for examples, are
> understandably a hindrance
> to understanding the discussions.  Clearly akusala
> vipaka for those who
> endure them, and possibly akusala kamma for those
> who propagate them.
> My apology to all.
>I wouldn't put it so seriously, Kom... I really
>wouldn't see this as akusala kamma for a start! The
>vipaka will have to wait for another post!
>What about all my typo mistakes?

Can't help it.  I am a serious guy.  Seriously, though, I took no offence on
the suggestion that I had many slips of mispellings.  Besides the fact that
it is true, sometimes I am just lazy, or ran out of time, to make sure that
the spellings are all right.  If I am lazy, that is certaily akusala.  It
may have no malice intention, but that's akusala nonetheless.

Anumoddhana for reminding yet once again that even while doing something
that can be superficially thought of kusala "deed", it may be, in fact,
akusala or kusala may be alternately rising with akusala.

kom



 
2849 From: amara chay   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 6:06pm
Subject: Re:_Papañca_[again]

 
  > Glad you enjoyed it....I've never been good at telling
> amusing stories, so I'm flattered (o.k. there's the
> mana) by your laughter! 
> 
> One little more twist to this story. Yesterday morning
> I went to see my acupuncturist for my weekly 'hit'
> with the needles for my throat problem. He suggested I
> take up early morning chanting! When I remember the
> words of the mantra, maybe I can try to juggle it with
> my early morning posts to this list! 


Dear Sarah,

Thanks for another 'hit' of laughter, maybe I could pass on to you my 
old recital to chant!  Might be better to chant the beneficence of the 
Buddha than some unintelligible syllables, even if it's for your 
throat!  Do take care of yourself, 

Anumodana for all the kusala,

Amara

 
2850 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 9:00pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re:_Papañca_[again]

 
  --- amara chay  wrote: > 

> Dear Sarah,
> 
> Thanks for another 'hit' of laughter, maybe I could
> pass on to you my 
> old recital to chant!  Might be better to chant the
> beneficence of the 
> Buddha than some unintelligible syllables, even if
> it's for your 
> throat!  Do take care of yourself, 
> 
> Anumodana for all the kusala,
> 
> Amara
> 

....ah, but chanting an intelligible and useful
recital, reflecting on it AND sending out posts at the
same time could be even more challenging than the
mantra, drums and climbing up the mountain routine! 


 
2851 From: kelvin liew peng chuan   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 9:23pm
Subject: Dan's view

 
  I have a similar view with Dan but I'm quite clear about the distance that 
sets the Dhamma appart frm others.I wonder if any of you guys read an 
article on the net condemming the Dhamma?(eg.Catholic Appologetics)Frm there 
you can see the striking difference .I believe the Dhamma as proclaimed by 
the Teacher is the most unique as every phenomenon is explainable and there 
are no hidden unfigured out things like mysteries.This is also the only 
teaching that challenges humans to face suffering straight in the face.

 
2852 From: Dan Dalthorp  <> 
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 9:54pm
Subject: Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!"

 
  Dear Kom,
Thanks for your excellent comments and questions. This is a topic 
that I find fascinating, and I hope to write more extensively about it 
on this forum. However, right now I do not have enough time to do the 
topic justice, so I am postponing it to a later date. 

> Hi Dan,
> 
> From the sila stand point, I think Buddhism looks similar to other
> religions at the most superficial level.  Beyond that there aren't 
many
> similarities.   from a non-specific standpoint, all Buddha teachings
> are beautiful at the beginning, beautiful in the middle, and 
beautiful
> at the end.  His teachings are profound refined, and his panna about
> realities is unmatched.  I can't certainly say the same thing about
> other religions.
> 
> In the more specific standpoints, here's what I found:
> 1) Sila in Buddhism has many levels: from sila without panna, sila 
with
> panna, sila with Satipatthana, and sila with maggha.  Now, if you 
have
> sila because it's the will/teaching of god.  Is that Sila with or
> without panna?
> 
> 2) People with different levels of panna perform sila for different
> purposes: because it's good, because it will bring you good things 
in
> return, or because it contributes to the path to Nibhanna.  In
> Christianity, isn't it true that even if you perform sila, the 
result
> is still uncertain.  It depends on god to make the judgement whether 
or
> not you are worthy.  The results of sila are subjective at best, but
> the results of sila in Buddhism are certain: it is simply how things
> work.
> 
> --- Dan Dalthorp <> wrote:
> > I agree for the most part. However, I'd say that on a superficial 
> > level, they appear completely different. On a more intermediate 
level
> > 
> > (once we get beyond the obvious differences in language and 
methods
> > of 
> > expressing truth), they appear very similar. On a deeper level, 
> > though, they are once again very different. 
> I would love to hear more specific details of why you say this. 
> Exception for the wordings and the outside appearances of person
> performign sila (not killing, not lying, etc.), I see no similarity.  
> 
> > Part of the difference is
> > 
> > that Christianity does not have a detailed description of the 
path. 
> > When pressed on what the path is, the response is that "faith is a 
> > gift from the Holy Spirit," which is quite a different from 
Buddha's 
> > [paraphrase of Rhys David's translation]: "Work out your own
> > salvation 
> > with diligence"--and then explicit instructions on how to do it!
> The Buddha teaches realities as things really are.  I see huge
> differences between Buddhism and other religion, betwen truths and
> non-truths.  What are the similarities?
> 
> > 
> > Another, less important but critical difference is the 
> > different emphasis on Jesus' two commandments: 1. Love God with 
all 
> > your heart; and 2. Love your neighbor as yourself. Theravada
> > Buddhists 
> > put greater emphasis on the former (internal, spiritual), and 
> > Christianity puts more emphasis on the latter. Both traditions do 
> > emphasize both "commandments," but the weight put on each is 
> > different.
> I also don't see how you say the first view point is a Buddhist view
> point?  That's certainly not matching any of the Buddha's teachings,
> perhaps not even matching to the teachings by Mahasi!  There is no 
god:
> it's not a person, and it's not animal: there can be no Metta toward
> god.  
> 
> kom
> 
> 
> 

 
2853 From:  
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 10:03pm
Subject: Re: Giving and Taking Offence

 
  Dear Kom and Sarah,

"Monks, a statement endowed with five factors is well-spoken, not ill-
spoken.
It is blameless & unfaulted by knowledgeable people. Which five? 

"It is spoken at the right time. It is spoken in truth. It is spoken
affectionately. It is spoken beneficially. It is spoken with a mind of
good-will. 

"A statement endowed with these five factors is well-spoken, not ill-
spoken. It
is blameless & unfaulted by knowledgeable people." 

Anguttara Nikaya V.198
Vaca Sutta - A Statement
Translated by Thanissaro Bhikku

Please note that 'well-spelled' is not included here.  As I've never 
known (either of) you to violate any of the other injunctions above, 
I think you're off the hook, Khun Kom!  

mike

p.s.  Wish I spelled HALF as well in a second or third language...

---  "tikmok"  wrote:
> Dear Sarah,
> 
> Thanks for your well thought-out reponse to my message, and thanks 
for
> attempting to mend any rift.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> > Mispellings of pali terms, for examples, are
> > understandably a hindrance
> > to understanding the discussions.  Clearly akusala
> > vipaka for those who
> > endure them, and possibly akusala kamma for those
> > who propagate them.
> > My apology to all.
> >I wouldn't put it so seriously, Kom... I really
> >wouldn't see this as akusala kamma for a start! The
> >vipaka will have to wait for another post!
> >What about all my typo mistakes?
> 
> Can't help it.  I am a serious guy.  Seriously, though, I took no 
offence on
> the suggestion that I had many slips of mispellings.  Besides the 
fact that
> it is true, sometimes I am just lazy, or ran out of time, to make 
sure that
> the spellings are all right.  If I am lazy, that is certaily 
akusala.  It
> may have no malice intention, but that's akusala nonetheless.
> 
> Anumoddhana for reminding yet once again that even while doing 
something
> that can be superficially thought of kusala "deed", it may be, in 
fact,
> akusala or kusala may be alternately rising with akusala.
> 
> kom
> 
> 

 
2854 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 11:57pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha

 
  Kom

> Although the
> understanding about Satipathanna was exact, but the
> samatha
> understanding I had before was derived from an
> exposure to an
> anapanasati technique, which could be way off from
> the technique that
> may actually work.   The concentration on breath, as
> taught by the
> school, certainly does not separate the porathamatha
> characteristics as
> different dhatus.  Rather, it was taught as a whole
> aggregate: you
> concentrate on the breath however way you can
> observe it: contact
> (hardness), warmth (dejo), and motion (apo).

As I understand it, the practice of samatha is not
undertaken by deciding to concentrate on the object in
question.  There is far more to it than this.  Nor is
the practice, as described in the Visuddhimagga, a
matter of concentrating on the breath as hardness,
warmth etc.
(Here again, I may differ from Robert.  But then he’s
off list for the time being …)

> However, I am willing to take Robert's explanation
> as a hypothesis. 
> Obviously, in order for this to be samatha, there
> must be panna
> arising.   Now this gets slightly more interesting. 
> There is panna
> rising with the citta cognizing a paramatha
> arammana, but the panna is
> not at the satipatthana level, i.e., the fact that
> it is just a dhatu
> and not self is not penetrated.  I didn't consider
> the possibility of
> panna arising with citta cognizing a paramatha
> arammana not being
> Satipatthana before.   Now, I ask you two (and
> anybody else), is this
> possible?

If one is focussing on, for example, the hardness that
is breath, with a view to developing samatha, that
would be thinking about hardness, just as is focusing
on the hardness that appears at the body-door now. 
Accordingly, the arammana is pannati (object of citta
that thinks).  As to whether there would be any level
of panna, I would think not, in either case (speaking
for myself, at least).


> After the breath becomes nimita (how does breath
> become nimita?  I
> don't think anybody has answered this question yet,
> although I don't
> need an answer anyway), the arammana is obviously
> pannati.  Also, as I
> understand it, the breath becomes so fine that the
> paramatha
> charactertics cannot be "observed" at some stage in
> the development
> anyway.

The breath does not become nimitta.  The breath
becomes more and more subtle, until it no longer
manifests.  Later, a nimitta appears.  The nimitta may
appear in one of many forms. (Vis VIII 208-216).
This is an extremely advanced stage of samatha, at
least by today’s standards.  We know so little about
the beginning stages of samatha.

> > Knowledge of
> > the difference between the 2 kinds of rupa
> > (conditioned by citta vs. conditioned by utu)
> would be
> > panna of the level of samatha bhavana, I suppose.
> Don't understand how one can differentiate the two
> without any kind of
> "special" nana, as Robert has said.  The dejo dhatu
> in the rupa kalapa
> conditioned by citta (citta samuthana) almost
> immediately conditions
> the rupa kalapa (utu-samuthana) to arise.  The
> poramatha
> characteristics are identical.   How can you tell
> the differences?  

I agree with your observations on this.  I think I
meant to say that panna of the level of samatha could
tell whether the object is breath (or something we
normally take for breath) or is, for example,
something we usually taken for the nose or lip.  What
I am trying to say is that panna of the level of
samatha does not allow any confusion as to the
meditation object.  But as you say, that level of
panna would not know anything about the conditioning
factors at play.

> > The difference between these 2 kinds of rupa is of
> no
> > significance in the development of satipatthana,
> since
> > satipatthana does not require the arising of
> awareness
> > in relation to any particular reality.  And as far
> as
> > I know, the characteristic of, say, hardness, is
> the
> > same whenever it appears to sati ie it does not
> differ
> > according to its conditioning factor/s.
> Now, this is expounded on so many time that this
> "appears" easy.  Whew,
> at least there is no controversy.

Yes, it’s a relief, isn’t it!
Thanks for your perceptive comments and challenging
questions.

Jonothan



 
2855 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 0:00am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Vedana associated with contemplating anatta

 
  Dhd5

--- Dan Dalthorp <> wrote:
 > Dear Jonathon,
> I don't find anything contradictory between Mahasi's
> and Buddhagosa's 
> comments. 

Thanks for clarifying this, and my apologies for
misreading your post by inferring that you did.


Buddhagosa does not discuss
> consciousnesses immediately 
> before bhaya-nana arises. Instead, he describes the
> experience of 
> bhaya-nana itself. Mahasi's comments apparently
> refer to an instant of 
> real fear which immediately spins into bhaya-nana as
> the mind reacts 
> wisely to the incipient "fear" before it develops
> into 
> full-fledged dosa. He does use the phrase "At that
> time...", but 
> everything happens very quickly... His "at that
> time" may be a slip 
> into everyday language and not a real confusion of
> the significance of 
> each individual thought moment. I believe that
> Mahasi was wise enough 
> to understand that panna does not arise coincident
> with domanassa. 

I would like to look more closely at the 2 texts
before commenting.

On the question discussed in our other exchange, if
there is no inconsistency with the Tipitaka, I’m not
sure why you refer to it/them as ‘deviation’.  This is
strong language!  Why not ‘interpretation’ or some
other less perjorative term?

Jonothan



 
2856  
Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 0:24am
Subject: Re: Giving and Taking Offence

 
  Dear Sarah,

   Thank you for a very nice and gently post.

Anumodana to your kusala citta,
Alex

---  Sarah Procter Abbott 
 wrote:
> 
> Dear Kom, Amara, Alex, Shin, Mike

 
2857 From: Dan Dalthorp  <> 
Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 1:12am
Subject: Re: Vedana associated with contemplating anatta

 
  Jonathon wrote:
> On the question discussed in our other exchange, if
> there is no inconsistency with the Tipitaka, I'm not
> sure why you refer to it/them as `deviation'.  This is
> strong language!  Why not `interpretation' or some
> other less perjorative term?
I sure don't mean my 'deviation' to have any pejorative 
connotations. I am using it in a strictly neutral sense of a 
"deviation" from Tipitaka is an idea that is "not included" in 
Tipitaka. This quasi-definition of 'deviation' comes very close to the 
dictionary sense and close enough to the meaning that I wish to convey 
that I am comfortable with the word. If you can help me find a more 
suitable alternative that you won't read as pejorative, I'd be happy 
to use it. 

'Interpretation' wouldn't work. For example, I don't think the 
workings of internal combustion engines can be explained by anyone's 
interpretation of Tipitaka. I think you need to go outside Tipitaka 
(i.e. deviate from Tipitaka) to find such an explanation.

 
2858 From:  
Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 10:27am
Subject: Re: perception/memory, consciousness

 
  Mike

I must say I have learnt a lot from reading your posts about inter-
personal relations, a skill in which I am rather lacking.  Would you 
mind if I copy your formula for use with my own posts?

> I certainly didn't mean to criticise.
> Please excuse my recklessness.
> I've been going a little too fast, trying to catch up--
> I'll have a look back and try to clarify my meaning.
> No offense, Ma'am!

I think I am getting the hang of it.  I just append this, suitably 
modified, to any post which might seem to question anything Amara has 
said.  Sort of a `thanks in advance' for sensitive situations.

Jonothan

BTW, does anyone have an off-list address for Robert?

 
2859 From: amara chay   
Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 11:01am
Subject: Re: Dan's view

 
  > I have a similar view with Dan but I'm quite clear about the 
distance that 
> sets the Dhamma appart frm others.I wonder if any of you guys read 
an 
> article on the net condemming the Dhamma?(eg.Catholic 
Appologetics)Frm there 
> you can see the striking difference .I believe the Dhamma as 
proclaimed by 
> the Teacher is the most unique as every phenomenon is explainable 
and there 
> are no hidden unfigured out things like mysteries.This is also the 
only 
> teaching that challenges humans to face suffering straight in the 
face.


Dear Kelvin,

I think that the main difference between Buddhism and other religions 
is that most others do not have bhavana.  All religions have dana 
(giving) and sila (rules to behave in society) to some extent, but 
without the knowledge of what the citta is bhavana cannot be rightly 
developed.  Before the Buddha bhavana as in samatha bhavana was taught 
since they knew the difference between kusala and akusala but not that 
there was no self doing the practice, so the moments of doing the 
samatha are exempt from kilesa of any kind, but having attained the 
jhana of different levels, they have the belief of the self who had 
attained with such purity, and mana and all the latent kilesa would 
still be there, so when the conditions come, they would be cause for 
the coarser kilesa to arise again, so that they are always prisoners 
of samsara, they could not end rebirth, though as the result of the 
jhana they might be born a brahma for an eternity in time.

After the vipaka (result of kamma, here the jhana citta) of being born 
in the brahma world had finished giving results, one could be born a 
human again, and have to begin over again, but with the Buddha's 
teachings, vipassana, bhavana was taken to the ultimate level, where 
rebirth is completely ended.  The self is shown not to exist and the 
'practice' is towards the realization of this truth, no matter with 
samatha or any kusala activities occurring simultaneously or not.  
Without the self, dana is not only giving for the good of others, but 
not to be attached to what is 'ours' as well.  Sila is not only to 
refrain from ill deeds (physical and mental) but to see our 
accumulations more clearly (mental) as well.  And bhavana need not be 
for those who live in the conditions favorable to the jhana arising 
such as live in the right place, wear the right clothing and eat the 
right food, etc. (in order to avoid the hindrances that keep the jhana 
from arising) which could only exist in an ascetic or recluse's life, 
but for anyone who studies realities as they really are.  The 
hindrances to vipassana are far fewer, and it can be practiced 
anywhere, unlike samatha, so that in a way the physical conditions are 
much easier to fulfil.  But the self could be much harder to 
eradicate, depending on the individual's accumulations.

For some individuals avid of results, sitting still might seem more 
peaceful than moving about, such as going to work, but vipassana is 
such a personal practice that people moving about might be more 
mindful than sitting with lobha expecting things to happen.  And when 
the jhana do arise, they could be cause for more lobha, clinging to 
such refined states of the citta.  The higher level of accumulated 
satipatthana also automatically bring the jhana citta with the arising 
of the nana, without ever practicing samatha bhavana (except as 
momentary development along with vipassana in daily life, when sati 
also arises with ekaggata cetasika in the citta).  In other words, 
vipassana encompasses samatha, but not the other way around, otherwise 
the Buddha's teachers, Aralatapas ans Utakatapas (spelling?) would 
have attained as well.  As it is they were born in the brahma plane 
and are there to this day.

This is why the Buddha's teachings could never be the same as any 
other teaching on earth, it is unique because of the provability, 
profundity as well as the person who taught it, whose accumulations 
towards the teaching was accumulated over zillions of centuries.  His 
teachings always remind us to study the present moment as realities 
arise through the six dvara no matter where we are.  Studying his 
teachings are more interesting to me more than trying to read between 
the lines for other teachings similitude to Buddhism, personally.  But 
we all have our individual accumulations, so whatever helps one 
understand the Dhamma better,

Anumosana in your studies,

Amara

 
2860 From: amara chay   
Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 11:08am
Subject: Re: Giving and Taking Offence

 
  > "Monks, a statement endowed with five factors is well-spoken, not 
ill-
> spoken.
> It is blameless & unfaulted by knowledgeable people. Which five? 
> 
> "It is spoken at the right time. It is spoken in truth. It is spoken
> affectionately. It is spoken beneficially. It is spoken with a mind 
of
> good-will. 
> 
> "A statement endowed with these five factors is well-spoken, not 
ill-
> spoken. It
> is blameless & unfaulted by knowledgeable people." 
> 
> Anguttara Nikaya V.198
> Vaca Sutta - A Statement
> Translated by Thanissaro Bhikku
> 
> Please note that 'well-spelled' is not included here.  As I've never 
> known (either of) you to violate any of the other injunctions above, 
> I think you're off the hook, Khun Kom!  


Dear Mike,

Thanks for the passage, which also lets me off the hook, having made 
my share of typos as everyone knows.

Amara

 
2861 From: amara chay   
Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 11:22am
Subject: Re: perception/memory, consciousness

 
  > > No offense, Ma'am!
> 
> I think I am getting the hang of it.  I just append this, suitably 
> modified, to any post which might seem to question anything Amara 
has 
> said.  Sort of a `thanks in advance' for sensitive situations.
> 
> Jonothan
> 
> BTW, does anyone have an off-list address for Robert?


Jonothan,

I hoope you do not mean to imply that I am above being questioned, 
after all the mistakes and appologies I have made to everyone!  In 
fact I think I enjoy questions, especially when they open up new 
fields of discussions, but corrections that are unfounded can get a 
little tiresome, most of all when the person should know the facts 
better than I do.

Amara

 
2862 From: amara chay   
Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 11:39am
Subject: Re: perception/memory, consciousness

 
  > > BTW, does anyone have an off-list address for Robert?


I also meant to give you Robert's e-mail, 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/post?protectID=194233250056127134213056109067021253018143238218134229182055166127046249149006227237009204035181

Amara

 
 
2863 From: amara chay   
Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 11:58am
Subject: Bangkok Post

 
  Dear all,

A little piece of good news about the website, this in the 
January 10, 2001 Bangkok Post newspaper the website review column,
Dot.co.th Highlights, gave really good review of our site and 
mentioned this discussion group as well!

Anumodana in all the kusala cetana,

Amara

 
2864 From:  
Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 0:13pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Precepts - Intoxicants

 
  dear metta jon,--->



--->"One or two people tried to tell me that if someone is a "Bodhisattva
with a high level of realization" that they could drink alcohol and
not be affected."  My response to that is: if they have such a high
level of realization, then they would have no attachment to or
craving for alcohol, and thus would not drink it.  One man said to
me: "But the Buddha was enlightened, and he still ate food."  To
which i responded: "Food is necessary for life; alcohol is not.  The
Buddha ate food so that he could support his body and mind to teach
the Dhamma (Dharma) to others."  Had i been in a sarcastic frame of
mind, i could have said, "When YOU become a Bodhisattva with a high
level of realization, then talk to me about it."<--------

:o)   !!



----> "Some Buddhists will tell you that enlightened beings don't need to
follow precepts.  This is true, but ONLY because their behavior
automatically conforms to the Dhamma.  When your character is such
that killing, stealing, lying, etc., are IMPOSSIBLE for you to
commit, then you don't need the precepts to tell you not to do those
things--because you wouldn't do them anyway.  The great sage named
Bodhidharma was quoted as saying: "Buddhas don't keep precepts;
Buddhas don't break precepts."<--------


Right! "keep precepts cos you break precepts."

:o)


Thanks.

 
2865 From:  
Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 0:12pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re:New year resolution

 
  Dear Shin,

>>"I am not here to attack
anybody or cause any akusula citta for anyone, and if my letter has attack
any of you, pls forgive me because my intentions are not to offend you in
any ways."<<

this is obvious,

Thanks

:o)

 
2866 From:  
Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 0:11pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!"

 
  dear Dan ,

you said >> "Jesus was not a follower of Buddha (he most
likely had never heard of Buddha), but a man who feels only compassion
for the men who torture him to death IS a follower of the Buddha's
teachings. Even though he wasn't at all fluent in the language of
Abhidhamma, Jesus displayed an incredible amount of wisdom. Can this
man, who never heard even heard the word "Buddha","<<


But I think some recent studies suggest otherwise,
Eventhough I cant mention any links or facts here , If I remember correctly I
have read some articles about,.

1. Jesus having some connections with buddist monasteries in middle east,
2. Jesus actually being a some sort of a buddhist monk for some short period of
time.
etc..

[ but of course , having read the holy bible and other scriptures , I personally
think that even if Jesus did hear some buddhist teaching at some point of time
he did not grasp it well or propagate it well to his followers..]

I know that this is not directly connected with this discussion thread , but
felt like telling this


Thanks

 
2867 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 2:24pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: perception/memory, consciousness

 
  Amara

This was really rather naughty of me, but I just
couldn't resist!

I do hope you will see it as a liberty on my part that
is born of our 25-plus years of dhamma-friendship.  I
believe you are already aware of the waggish
tendencies lurking under my otherwise serious
exterior.

Amara, let me say how much I have appreciated the many
helpful posts you have been putting out lately.  There
has obviously been much kusala thought put into them. 
I look forward to reading many more.

Jonothan


--- amara chay  wrote: > > > No
offense, Ma'am!
> > 
> > I think I am getting the hang of it.  I just
> append this, suitably 
> > modified, to any post which might seem to question
> anything Amara 
> has 
> > said.  Sort of a `thanks in advance' for sensitive
> situations.
> > 
> > Jonothan
> > 
> > BTW, does anyone have an off-list address for
> Robert?
> 
> 
> Jonothan,
> 
> I hoope you do not mean to imply that I am above
> being questioned, 
> after all the mistakes and appologies I have made to
> everyone!  In 
> fact I think I enjoy questions, especially when they
> open up new 
> fields of discussions, but corrections that are
> unfounded can get a 
> little tiresome, most of all when the person should
> know the facts 
> better than I do.
> 
> Amara



 
2868 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 2:38pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: perception/memory, consciousness

 
  Dear Friends,


--- Jonothan Abbott  wrote: >
Amara
> 
> This was really rather naughty of me, but I just
> couldn't resist!
> 
.....and if any of you have any advice on how I can
moderate the moderator, please let me know!

Sarah 


 
2869 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 2:50pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Precepts - Intoxicants

 
  Dear metta Jon,

Firstly, another welcome to the group and what a
useful post to enter with.

--- Metta Jon  wrote: > 

> One should avoid this occasion for evil, this
> madness, this delusion,
> this joy of fools."
> 

When I was a child, my father was a bright, popular,
Cambridge educated lawyer and a very affectionate
father who loved reading Bertrand Russell. He used to
drink socially and occasionally to excess but was
never abusive in anyway and I never knew him to tell a
lie.

He died at 60 as an alcoholic and in the last few
years lost everything: his wife, his family, his work,
his wealth, his health, his reputation.....

So these are poignant reminders. 

On a lighter note, we (usually I) always invite new
members to share a little background (or a lot is fine
too) so that we can get to 'know' you a little more
and hear how you've come to join us.

Look forward to hearing more of your excellent,
well-researched posts.

Sarah




 
2870 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 3:05pm
Subject: List Housekeeping

 
  Dear Mike,

--- "m. nease"  wrote: > Dear > 
> Actually, I'm much to stingy of space on my hard
> drive--I keep these 'folders' on Yahoo's server. 
> While you have a message open, there's a little
> window
> in the upper right corner of you screen reading,
> 'Choose Folder'.  If you select 'New Folder' from
> that
> list, then click on 'Move', you'll be prompted for a
> name for the new 'folder'.  Once you've filled that
> in, the message will be saved in that folder
> indefinitely.  After that, you can click on the '+'
> sign next to 'Folders' (to the left of your message
> window), and select the 'folder' you'd like to view.
> 
> Hope this is of some use!
> 
> mike    
> 
Thanks for this (will try it when I'm not posting or
reading).

Actually there's so much useful information in the
archives after only a year and none of us ever have
time to go back and trace messages for any newbies. 

What we really need (I think) is some sort of index
system to help us all, but I've no idea how this is
done. Any volunteers out there? Another (smallish)
problem is that s'times the threads lead away from the
original subject headings....

I'm sure other groups (perhaps the longer established
Christian groups) have sorted out these difficulties
and have some tips we could 'borrow'! 

Thanks 

Sarah



2871 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 3:22pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Friends, Robes & Terminology

 
  Dear Jim,

--- Jim Anderson  wrote: > Dear 
> The 2 older translations of Abhidh-s (CPD abbr.) you
> mention are
> probably the same 2 I have by Narada and S.Z. Aung.

exactly

> I don't have Bodhi's
> translation but have been thinking about ordering a
> copy. 

I highly recommend this.....it's made the others quite
redundant for us.

I most often use
> Narada's translation and notes but only for
> reference and have not tried to
> work my way through it from cover to cover. 

I think this is the best way....I'm not sure how much
one gains from reading books like this cover to cover
but we all have different ways. 

However,
> the Abhidh-s does
> contain a lot of useful information that helps me to
> understand some of the
> messages on this list. Some recent examples were
> those concerning the hetus
> of individuals which Alex and Amara posted and also
> in my reading of
> 'Realities and Concepts' there is much in it that is
> coming from Abhidh-s
> and its tika. So I'm interested in becoming better
> acquainted with these
> texts in Pali. 

I'm impressed. Pls share any points of particular
interest (although I know it's much easier to do this
if the translation is on line and one can just put a
link..)

I have four versions of Abhidh-s and
> two versions of its tika
> to work with plus the two translations mentioned
> above.

Your cabin begins to sound like a large dhamma
library, (a cosy one of course with that fire
burning!) 
> 
> Glad to be back on board! Normally, whenever I leave
> my cottage I also leave
> behind my access to the internet and I would have
> quite a bit of catching up
> to do when I got back. But this time while in the
> city I bought a laptop
> computer and was able to connect online from it
> while there and keep up with
> reading the messages. 

I'm beginning to think we're going to have to do the
same (i.e. invest in a laptop) for travels just to
keep up with the reading here!

I also felt that it was a good
> idea to have a laptop
> as a backup in case my desktop computer fails to
> work as it did several
> times last year.

Glad to hear you won't have any excuses for dropping
out at those times! I can't stress enough how glad we
are to have your Pali expertise (not to mention 8
copies of Abhid-s w/ tikas) to refer to.

Best wishes too,

Sarah


 
2872 From: kelvin liew peng chuan   
Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:23pm
Subject: Re:re:Dan's view

 
  Saddhu Amara for the insight shared on the diference between the Dhamma and 
other religious teaching.Thank you for the explanation.
                                      with metta ~ Kelvin

 
2873 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:42pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ordering tapes and books from Bangkok

 
  Mike

> Just to update you on my efforts to digitize the
> tapes
> Robert sent me:  I still haven't overcome the
> technological hurdles to getting these onto the web.
> 
> As it turns out, the sound card needed to run the
> software to re-master the recordings is not
> compatible
> with my computer.  I think the answer will be a new
> computer, so it may be a little while yet.  I'll
> keep
> you posted...

In Bangkok (at the Foundation) they have put Khun
Sujin's talks into MP3 format on CD-ROM's. If you
think this experience might be helpful to you, I am
told that the person to contact is Khun Unnop whose
email address is the one given as the cc addressee for
tapes and books orders (I will post it as soon as i
manage to locate it)

Jonothan


 
2874 From: shinlin   
Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 6:59pm
Subject: ACCOUNT has been OPEN

 
  Dear Dhamma Friends,
    Today we have opened an account at the BANGKOK BANK under the name of K.Sukin. M.Betty and myself. At least, two people will have to sign the account together to be abke to withdrawal the money from the account.
    To make things easier to understand, I will make write it clearly at the below for your future process of the contribution to the printing of the Paramattadhamma Book and the handling charges for the books to be sent to you.
1. The account name is   LIN,SHIAU-IN
    Bangkok Bank, Bangkapi Branch 
    Account name:-105-4-368194
    Swift Address :-BKKBTHBK
2. Pls convert all the donation and handling charges into Thai currency from your side. So to reduce the banking charges here in Thailand which in the end will leave your donation to nothing because every charge will take at least 250 baht for the convertion in Thailand( example:- if you transfer US$ 5 dollar for the postage, this will not be enough for the postage charges). So we suggest you to convert the contributions and charges into Thai currency from your side. Pls kindly talk to the International or currency transfer at your bank in your country.
3. All the postage charges will be posted on the website very soon. We are going to find out about the charges through courier and post. So anyone can use either of these services.
4. Once you have transfered the donation or charges into the account, pls kindly inform me or email me (and cc M. Betty, K.Amara,in case my mail server is down), so I can keep an accurate record and account of it. This is a very sensitive issue so we would not like to make any mistakes.
5. Once we get the hang of it, we will post the balance of the account monthly onto the website for your reference. 
 
If there is anything, you would like to suggest in this matter. Pls feel free to do so. Thankyou.
with metta,
Shin 
 
2875 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 10:19pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] ACCOUNT has been OPEN

 
  Dear Shin & Amara.

Congratulations on your work towards the printing of
Amara’s translation of 'Summary'.

While there may be some list members who would like to
contribute, we feel that the subject of printing and
donations generally is not really appropriate for this
list.  Some other members have commented on this too.

We notice that you plan to use Amara’s website to post
the information.  By all means feel free to post a
link to the website here from time to time.  But as a
general rule, messages regarding the printing and
donations should be exchanged off this list.

Good luck with your efforts.

Jonothan & Sarah
(Moderators)



--- shinlin  wrote: 
> Dear Dhamma Friends,
>     Today we have opened an account at the BANGKOK
> BANK under the name of
> K.Sukin. M.Betty and myself. At least, two people
> will have to sign the
> account together to be abke to withdrawal the money
> from the account.



 
2876 From: amara chay   
Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 11:22pm
Subject: Re: ACCOUNT has been OPEN

 
  > While there may be some list members who would like to
> contribute, we feel that the subject of printing and
> donations generally is not really appropriate for this
> list.  Some other members have commented on this too.
> 
> We notice that you plan to use Amara's website to post
> the information.  By all means feel free to post a
> link to the website here from time to time.  But as a
> general rule, messages regarding the printing and
> donations should be exchanged off this list.


Dear all,

Actually it is my fault that Shin posted the information on this list, 
probably out of the Thai custom where it is considered presenting 
others with the opportunities to anumodana (have empathic joy) which 
in Buddhism is considered kusala citta.  This aspect of accumulating 
kusala is discussed a little in the article, 'The Master Avengers' in 
the the intermediate section in <http://www.dhammastudy.com/>, by the 
way.  In one of the sutta, there is even the possibility of the person 
who anumodanas to accumulate an even greater kusala than the person 
who did the deed, as in one where a newly born deva is visited by 
another who was from a higher plane.  The latter told the newcomer 
that they had been sisters in their last lifetimes and that they had 
married the same person.  The newly arrived deva then recalled that 
she had been the first wife and had done much dana in that life and 
could not understand why the minor wife who did not have much 
possessions was reborn in a higher plane than herself, but the 
former sister/minor wife explained that it was because she had 
anumodana with mudita the kusala that her former sister had done, and 
the kusala resulted in her higher rebirth.  I will ask for the proper 
references if you wish, unless someone could please find it for us.

Betty and I talked about anumodana just yesterday, I think, and it 
does not mean 'thank you' as some might think, it is mudita in others' 
kusala, therefore it is for the person who has the kusala citta 
arising in seeing other's good deeds.  As kusala is sometimes hard to 
find, most people avid of kusala citta like to hear of others' kusala 
so they could have a moment where their citta evolves in dana, sila or 
bhavana, and to anumodana is bhavana, peace from lobha, dosa, and 
moha, in momentary peace.  I am sorry we seem to have caused the 
opposite reaction and will therefore ask Shin not to post them on the 
list any more.

Just to explain the situation more clearly about the announcement on 
the website, there will be none about the printing.  We are in fact 
only considering placing an order form for the free books with the 
difference that on the web so many people asked for them that some 
people are not sure if they really wanted to read them or just ordered 
out of curiosity, so we are considering setting up an order form where 
the reader participates in the shipping and handling costs, nothing to 
do with the printing of this new book in the least.  We have not 
discussed the pros and cons of announcing the printing in the website, 
so far.  We certainly will at our next meeting.  

In short it was not our intention to cause dosa in anyone, nor do we 
think we did anything wrong, having never asked for any contributions 
of any kind.  Rather we thought some people might like the opportunity 
to anumodana, the directly opposite feeling.  Since it has turned out 
this way, there will be no further mention of the printings or 
donations.

Again, Shin was only doing what I had asked her to do and I think my 
intentions were entirely altruistic, sorry if some are offended,

Amara

 
2877 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Thu Jan 11, 2001 0:42pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Friends, Robes & Terminology

 
  --- "m. nease"  wrote: 

> Dear Sarah,

> >...'He
> > who
> > practises this practice of the Arousing of
> > Mindfulness
> > is called a bhikkhu'....'Accordingly it is said:
> > 
> >     "Well-dressed one may be, but if one is calm,
> >      Tamed, humble,pure,a man who does no harm
> >      To aught that lives, that one's a brahmin
> true.
> >      An ascetic and mendicant too'Dhp142
> 
> Nice citation! Especially in the context of the
> 'robes' thread.  As you may recall, I have yet to
> read
> the commentaries--so you may be engaging in a duel
> of
> wits with an unarmed opponent...

Mike, you're a LOT more familiar with the suttas than
I am and really I've read preciously little of the
commentaries, but sometimes the extra notes and maps
do help!
 
> Sarah, I'm NOT disagreeing with you.  But the
> distinction comes not from reading the suttas, but
> from reading the commentaries.  I hope you know
> that,
> by now, I'm convinced of the value of that.

Well I think it comes from the way the suttas are
read...as we've discussed before, the suttas can be
read with many different kinds of understanding. As
Robert said in a post, how he reads the Visuddhimagga
now is completely different from when he read it the
first time. The commentaries just give a little extra
help or a few tips but can also be misread. Same with
the abhidhamma: it can be the best friend or the worst
foe depending on how it is understood and the purpose
it is read.
>  
> > it referred to night and day and K.Sujin explained
> > that night refers to a 24hr period as in booking a
> > hotel for 2nts!  
> 
> Not surprising at all.  Same expression is common
> around the ancient world, in the form of 'moons'
> rather than 'suns'.

There you go...yu have some extra tips that I don't
hape from your wider knowledge in these areas!!
> 
> Well, it's of great interest to me, in particular,
> but
> more to the point, as an example of the value of
> approaching the dhammavinaya by way of the
> commentaries, and therefore of the great benefit of
> having the members of this group as 'admirable
> friends...

Yes, I agree on both accounts.

BTW, I meant to thank you for also posting the link
and comments on Piyajatika Sutta (From One Who is
Dear). It's been a condition for some useful
reflection even though I had nothing to add because
the Sutta really said it all! 

Sarah


 
 
2878 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Thu Jan 11, 2001 11:17pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Vedana associated with contemplating anatta

 
  Dan

> I sure don't mean my 'deviation' to have any
> pejorative 
> connotations. I am using it in a strictly neutral
> sense of a 
> "deviation" from Tipitaka is an idea that is "not
> included" in 
> Tipitaka. This quasi-definition of 'deviation' comes
> very close to the 
> dictionary sense and close enough to the meaning
> that I wish to convey 
> that I am comfortable with the word. If you can help
> me find a more 
> suitable alternative that you won't read as
> pejorative, I'd be happy 
> to use it. 

Thanks for the explanation.

But I would be interested to know what terms you would
use to distinguish, in the case of writings on the
dhamma, those ‘deviations’ that are consistent with
the Buddha’s teaching from those that are not.

I appreciate that in one sense it doesn’t really
matter what label we attach to things.  But I’m
intrigued by your choice of terms.

I seem to recall the Buddha saying in one sutta that
dhamma is dhamma in whatever form it is found or from
whatever source – but is it your position that
anything not actually from the mouth of the Buddha
falls into the category of a ‘deviation’?  Would you,
for example, refer to the commentaries to the Tipitaka
also as ‘deviations’?

Jonothan



 
2879 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Thu Jan 11, 2001 11:23pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sitting "vs" non-sitting; vitakka, vicara and samatha, pannati and paramattha dhammas

 
  Mike

This is not an easy area to discuss, but I will do the
best I can.

----------------------------
> > Breath, it seems to me, is a concept.  Like with
> the
> > concept ‘body’, it is possible that there can be
> > awareness of one of the realities that we normally
> > take for breath/body, and at such moments no
> concept
> > of breath/body appears.  But there is no
> paramattha
> > dhamma ‘breath’, just as there is no paramattha
> > dhamma
> > ‘body’.
> 
> I was instructed, for this reason, to focus on 'the
> rise and fall of the abdomen', rather than the
> breath
> at the tip of the nose.  The rationale was that, if
> one focused on the sensat