5000 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Apr 28, 2001 8:21am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Abhidhamma, Khun Sujin, and My Practice Dear Mike and howard, Thanks for telling us your feelings to date, Howard. I too don't limit myself to Abhidhamma. There are a lot of teachings in the Tipitaka and it is good to take a balanced approach. I'll just comment on mikes post: --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Howard, > > 1. Everything I ever thought I knew or understood > about the Dhamma is completely wrong. I don't think so Mike. There may`have been some important misunderstandings but not everything. > 2. There is no kusala kamma except sammasati of the > eightfold path, which arises only with the stages of > enlightenment. there are other types of kusala kamma that are not directly part of the eightfold path. > 3. There is no intervening practice between total > ignorance and stream-entry, except, apparently, > hearing the Dhamma (which can only happen totally > passively, as the present result of past intentions) > and reading the Abhidhamma and commentaries (and > certain authors). Not exactly. You say passively but what about viriya(energy). Viriya arises to listen , to contemplate, to be patient, to be aware. It is not "our" viriya though. The hearing must be applied. Even at times when there is no Buddhasasana (and thus no deep teaching leading to enligtenment) there can be the accumulation of other parami - patience, generosity, metta..... These all support panna. They are needed too. > 4. Even if there were other practices, they would be > impossible because of anatta and anicca. > 5. There are no Four Noble Truths (therefore no > Eightfold Path) except for ariyans. What about ariyadukkha -sacca (truth of suffering) and samudaya-sacca (truth of cause of suffering). these are present whether one knows of them or not. > 6. All effort (except by ariyans) is either akusala or > incomprehensible. Effort is either kusala or akusala. there may be kusala effort arising now that assists the other mental factors that are contemplating this. When there is a moment of sati that knows (even in a vague way) dhammas there is kusala viriya. It may be hard to know whether the viriya is kusala or akusala though. > 7. All samatha practices, therefore all suttas > referring to them are obsolete. 8. Although the sense of self is not eradicated until > total enlightenment, any understanding, thought, > speech, action, livelihood, effort, mindfulness or > concentration accompanied by a sense of self is > akusala, micchaditthi and completely unrelated to the > Eightfold Path. We can do many types of kusala and still have an idea of self. This has to be carefully explained. > 9. There is no such thing as skilful reflection except > by ariyans. Any idea that I can understand any > exhortation or reflection of the Buddha is ipso facto > akusala and micchaditthi. I think there are different levels of understanding. We can't expect to have no idea of self at all from the word GO. But hearing the Dhamma and seeing just how much self there is means that the idea of self is seen as a type of clinging. > 10. Anything I imagine I can think, say or do is > akusala and micchaditthi. 11. Anything kusala thought to be arising > subjectively, even if consciously unaccompanied by the > idea of a self conditioning it, is necessarily akusala > and micchaditthi unless it can be directly perceived > as nama or rupa--i.e., by an Ariyan. No. It is so gradual. It is more of a mixed bag. There may be some awareness now of dhammas even if they are not clearly perceived as nama or rupa. Robert 5001 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Apr 28, 2001 8:38am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cessation The very last section of the Visuddhimagga goes into this Erik. I asked nina similar questions many years back. There is a type of cessation that only those arahants and anagami who have mastery of jhana and whose path was that of samatha and insight (not sukkavipassaka) can attain. --- Erik wrote: > > Okay, here's an issue I've been somewhat onclear on for some > time > now. Cessation. Not nirodha as in kilesa-nirodha, but > "cessation" as > applies to anagamis who have arrived there via negating the > fourth > arupa-jahana as for example found in the Cula Sunnata Sutta. > > Is this "cessation" (other than the physiological activity of > being > in "suspended animation") synonymous with the actual realizion > of > nibbana? If this is the case it seems this would be through > phala > cittas; there would be no magga-cittas associated with this. > Is this > correct? If this is so then there would seem to be no > advantage to > cessation, given the phala cittas don't terminate kilesas. No BIG advantage as you say. But a damm good rest! They say that giving dana to one who has just arisen from this bears very high fruit. > > Because of this, I am curious what the stated purpose of > teachings > on "cessation" are. It is inessential to liberation from my > understanding, and the only argument I can see for it at > present is > that it is, like the jhanas, taught by the Buddha because it > is > conducive to well-being here and now (though jhanas are also > necessary in the case of non-sukkhavipassaka practitioners). Completeness of teaching. There were those who had the accumulations to attain this and so it should be taught. Not so important for us to think much about it. I > > suppose one could use it to make money pulling stunts like > getting > buried alive for a few weeks and living to tell about it. > > That reminds me, is there an equivalent term for > sukkhavipassakas for > jhana practitioners? I have seen these two approaches rendered > as > vipassana-yanika and samatha-yanika, but I have also seen the > use of > these two terms challenged on the basis of their not really > reflecting the way things are, given vipassana is a necessary > in all > cases. The term you use is correct and I think there is another term too. robert 5002 From: Num Date: Sat Apr 28, 2001 6:01am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Abhidhamma, Khun Sujin, and My Practice Hi Mike, Sound like you are given up. At time I felt like that as well. Hope you don't mind if I try to say something, just want to cheer you up. Come on, I am still floating in the big ocean, see no sign of land around, just want to say that "keep swimming." Our minds can trick us, if we give up, for sure we will be floating up and down in samsara ocean forever. I will be a little tricky in this reply, OK. > 1. Everything I ever thought I knew or understood > about the Dhamma is completely wrong. This may be a right understanding. Right understanding can see the difference between what is right and what is wrong. > 2. There is no kusala kamma except sammasati of the > eightfold path, which arises only with the stages of > enlightenment. > 3. There is no intervening practice between total > ignorance and stream-entry, except, apparently, > hearing the Dhamma (which can only happen totally > passively, as the present result of past intentions) > and reading the Abhidhamma and commentaries (and > certain authors). > 4. Even if there were other practices, they would be > impossible because of anatta and anicca. > 5. There are no Four Noble Truths (therefore no > Eightfold Path) except for ariyans. > 6. All effort (except by ariyans) is either akusala or > incomprehensible. I total disagree with this, the trip around the world always starts with first footstep. Viriya is itti (power), never underestimate power of viriya. The Buddha never said that the path is a easy path. It's the path that is less taken, most people enjoy other paths. But the path is exist, it needs a traveler to complete the task though. > 7. All samatha practices, therefore all suttas > referring to them are obsolete. > 8. Although the sense of self is not eradicated until > total enlightenment, any understanding, thought, > speech, action, livelihood, effort, mindfulness or > concentration accompanied by a sense of self is > akusala, micchaditthi and completely unrelated to the > Eightfold Path. Even akusula can be paccaya or condition following kusula. Nobody born with purely kusula life or enlightenment. I think we need to know both kusula and akusula to develop right understanding. > 9. There is no such thing as skilful reflection except > by ariyans. Any idea that I can understand any > exhortation or reflection of the Buddha is ipso facto > akusala and micchaditthi. > 10. Anything I imagine I can think, say or do is > akusala and micchaditthi. This is impossible, I could not imagine to see a person with only akusula citta or vipaka. Hmmm, I don't think so. I might be wrong, both kusula and akusula are arised and ceased by causes and conditions. > 11. Anything kusala thought to be arising > subjectively, even if consciously unaccompanied by the > idea of a self conditioning it, is necessarily akusala > and micchaditthi unless it can be directly perceived > as nama or rupa--i.e., by an Ariyan. > 12. Any hope of any kind of progress, ever, is a > delusion. There is no path to the cessation of > suffering except for those on its very threshold. > Again, I personally believe there is the path. I am not sure that there is a traveler who dares to take it. Look around, you will not feel lonely. There are a lot of swimmers, at least on this list. Num 5004 From: Herman Date: Sat Apr 28, 2001 3:29pm Subject: Re: Abhidhamma, Khun Sujin, and My Practice Dear Mike, (Sorry Howard, I am using your post to reply to Mike, can't find the original) The light is in your self. The truth is in your self. The Dhamma is in your self. It's nice to have cyber buddies but I never accept directions from someone who is pointing me down their own path. They don't understand yet ...... With lovingkindness (Don't you think the English has a ring to it:-) Herman --- Howard wrote: > Dear Mike - > > My heart really goes out to you. I have no doubt that that you are > quite mistaken and that you have NOT wasted thirty years. For some reason, > you have been driven to what I see as extreme conclusions. Please remember > that the Buddha's path is a *middle* path. Please don't take the view that > progress must either be total or nil. You CAN get there from here! With the > right, fortunate experiences, it is possible to gain GREAT confidence. With > appropriate samatha training, it IS possible to reach jhanic states. (I KNOW > this for a fact.) With appropriate vipassana training, it IS possible to > glimpse the unreality of self in the person and in "things" and to gain > enormous confidence in the Buddha's way. (I know THAT for a fact as well.) > Please don't despair. There is really so much of value here - so much that > really IS possible. Try sometime a Goenka retreat - I found that that gave me > enormous confidence in the Dhamma. I only went to one, but it was wonderful. > > With metta, > Howard > > In a message dated 4/27/01 1:45:02 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > "m. nease" writes: > > > > Dear Howard, > > > > You're so much better informed than I am, and so much > > better-spoken. My heart really goes out to you with > > this post, and it inspires me to post several > > tentative and extremely discouraging conclusions I've > > painfully and gradually come to myself. I hope you > > don't mind my piggy-backing on your MUCH more > > thoughtful post. > > > > 1. Everything I ever thought I knew or understood > > about the Dhamma is completely wrong. > > 2. There is no kusala kamma except sammasati of the > > eightfold path, which arises only with the stages of > > enlightenment. > > 3. There is no intervening practice between total > > ignorance and stream-entry, except, apparently, > > hearing the Dhamma (which can only happen totally > > passively, as the present result of past intentions) > > and reading the Abhidhamma and commentaries (and > > certain authors). > > 4. Even if there were other practices, they would be > > impossible because of anatta and anicca. > > 5. There are no Four Noble Truths (therefore no > > Eightfold Path) except for ariyans. > > 6. All effort (except by ariyans) is either akusala or > > incomprehensible. > > 7. All samatha practices, therefore all suttas > > referring to them are obsolete. > > 8. Although the sense of self is not eradicated until > > total enlightenment, any understanding, thought, > > speech, action, livelihood, effort, mindfulness or > > concentration accompanied by a sense of self is > > akusala, micchaditthi and completely unrelated to the > > Eightfold Path. > > 9. There is no such thing as skilful reflection except > > by ariyans. Any idea that I can understand any > > exhortation or reflection of the Buddha is ipso facto > > akusala and micchaditthi. > > 10. Anything I imagine I can think, say or do is > > akusala and micchaditthi. > > 11. Anything kusala thought to be arising > > subjectively, even if consciously unaccompanied by the > > idea of a self conditioning it, is necessarily akusala > > and micchaditthi unless it can be directly perceived > > as nama or rupa--i.e., by an Ariyan. > > 12. Any hope of any kind of progress, ever, is a > > delusion. There is no path to the cessation of > > suffering except for those on its very threshold. > > > > Sorry these aren't better organized. Just a few > > tentative conclusions to thirty years' wasted time, > > off the top of my head. > > > > mike > > 5005 From: J.L. Date: Sat Apr 28, 2001 6:27pm Subject: Mr Amara -explain yourself mate Mr Amara Hi,I am a new member.I am woundering maybe I have joined the wrong group, I have never heard such rude and slanderous speach before, I hope you are not a buddhist Monk, I am just learning Buddhism and I dont like what I read in your post. could you please explain what on earth is going on with Metta J.L. PS I also have read a little about Thai Forest Monks from Insite to Buddhism, I think they a good monks, why are you treating these chappies so Bad --- "Amara" wrote: > > > Contarary to what you feel about all my past statements on Dhamma- > > Vinaya. I assure you they are not my made up views. I do not > > classify > > myself worthy to possess any view pertaining to the masters Dhamma > > Vinaya, other aspects yes to my fullest potential. For a long time > > now I have been using the views from some of your/our Greatest Thai > > Forest Buddhist Masters. > > Dear Marlon, > > I have never studied any other teachings but those of the Tipitaka, > and do not wish to, whether they are Thai or not they are not mine if > they do not explain the Tipitaka or refute it in any way. > > > Nobody has caught on to this yet. Maybe > > because most of you find them not worthy to be studied. They spent a > > lifetime experiencing true Dhamma, and they succeeded in > > understanding it perfectly, because they had to live like the Buddha > > to experience the meaning of the Dhamma, not like some pleasure > > filled Dhamma experts nowadays who churn out their own renditions of > > some of the Buddhas most Noble works from their own experiences > which > > amount to NOTHING. I beg to set the record straight before someone > > puts his noble foot into his noble mouth. > > The Buddha did not live in the forest all the time, he lived in > mahaviharas the ruins of which you have yourself photographs of in > your website, in the vicinity of the great cities where he taught > kings and princes as well as leprous beggars. He did it was true that > he spent a lot of time in remote areas but his main purpose was, after > his enlightenment, to teach and he couldn't very well teach where > there are no people. He spent most of the time, as one sees in the > Tipitaka, or those of us who read it do, accepting alms and teaching, > not running off to sit alone in supposed beatitude as some people > might have us think. Those who do that and claim to have led the > Buddha's life and experienced the same thing should indeed study the > Tipitaka so that when they put their foot in their mouth they would > know it instead of thinking others do without realizing the truth in > the Tipitaka. > > People who think they experience what the Buddha did without knowing > what he taught in the Tipitaka, without learning the dhamma as he > taught even through the oral tradition would be like some monkeys I > saw near some meditation centers where they see all the people moving > S_L_O_W_L_L_Y in silence and start to do the same. I suppose they > gain the same insight. > > On the contrary if one knows the nature of citta and cetasika, that > panna or right understanding of things as they really are is the only > thing that can eradicate moha which is at the root of all kilesa, and > that panna like all other things except nibbana has to be conditioned > to arise, and how to condition panna with satipatthana, one could live > anywhere, as the Buddha did, even when he went to the heavenly planes > to teach. One could be a king and attain high levels of wisdom, or be > a slave and do the same. One does not have to become a forest monk > and imitate the exterior image of the Buddha discounting what he did > after he became enlightened. Indeed those who imitated the wrong > parts, such as when he fasted to the extreme before his attainment > would be doing something he forbade others to do as futile exercise. > > > Your quote:--- > > "". I know that I am the reason why I have > > not yet escaped samsara, but I also know that panna alone would be > > able to free me, when accumulated to a certain level. Panna would > > then, as the Buddha taught, perform its function whether there is > > 'commitment that is required' of us or not. To 'want' to do > something > > without right understanding and study could never end kilesa, rather > > the opposite. I don't know if it is to return home, but taking > refuge > > in his teachings is what I am most comfortable with, anyone taking a > > long journey home to the beginning of time has my best wishes and > 'bon > > voyage'!-----Amara > > > > My Reply to you:--- > > Pertaining to your view on "commitment". This breaches fundamental > > Basic Buddhist Doctrine. "Commitment" is the vehicle for you to seek > > Panna (wisdom). Panna is an on going process, it doesen't come to > you > > all at once, or am I to presume that in your case you are different. > > Your presumption that Panna (wisdom) alone without commitment will > > allow you to be free ( I presume you mean Nivarna) is difficult to > > accept as it goes against the view of a multitude of Scholars, data > > too numerous for me to list. Or may I presume you actually meant it > > in a totally different context. > > I do not expect anyone to accept anything, there are zillions of > beings who are not Buddhists. But this is what the Buddha taught in > the Tipitaka, if anyone cared to study it. The sukkhavipassaka attain > nibbana through panna alone and not through jhana. If you do not > believe the Tipitaka that is your problem, you and your forest > dwellers could perhaps start a new religion, perhaps the forest > dwelling sect or something. Actually a lot of the bhikkhus in the > Buddha's time were forest dwellers, but they had the accumulations > which, after the basics have been learnt, could develop satipatthana > along with other kusala. Nowadays people make a big thing about such > life which was common back then, besides the fact that there are fewer > forests now. And most could not tell when they are attached to the > subtle lobha for sitting and expecting unusual things to happen which > they immediately cling to as something good ordinary people don't get > to see. But is there any real knowledge of things as they really are > at that time? Of sight as sight, of seeing as seeing, of sound as > sound, not color, of hearing at that moment? Is there knowledge of > nama as nama or rupa as rupa? After that can they tell without > uncertainty what is the manodvara like? If not, others than > experiencing some strange and ultimately useless things, and even > harmful ones if one clings to it and develop even more lobha without > being conscious of it, what knowledge is gained in the least? What > kusala citta? > > Those who developed jhana in the old days before the Buddha taught > them how to do it with vipassana, at least knew what kusala citta were > and how to develop it. Nowadays just about anyone can imitate the > gestures and postures, but few could attain the same panna even if > only at the jhana level. I don't care what a person says, if he > doesn't agree with the Tipitaka, or who he is or was, after all, > Devadata who was perhaps foremost in wrong view, was also a bhikkhu in > the Buddhist order, as I said in a previous post. > > Amara > > > Amara,Pertaining to your quote ""anyone taking a long journey home > to > > the beginning of time has my best wishes and 'bon voyage'" > > "Ven S Dhammika on being asked the question on his definition of > > Nirvana had this to say? > > ""It is a dimension transcending time and space and thus is > difficult > > to talk about or even think about. Words and thoughts being only > > suited to describe the time-space dimension. But because Nirvana is > > beyond time, there is no movement and so no ageing or dying. Thus > > Nirvana is eternal because it is beyond space, there is no boundary, > > no concept of Self and not-self and thus Nirvana is infinite.-- Ven > S > > Dhammika 5006 From: Amara Date: Sat Apr 28, 2001 6:48pm Subject: Re: Can Arahants Die --- Erik wrote: > --- "Amara" wrote: > > I'm quite impressed with > > your quest for knowledge even though at times I do not agree with > your > > methods of acquisition. > > I am curious which methods of acquisition you disagree with. > Comparing systems, for example? Nothing wrong with comparing systems, but false accusations remain a kind of musavada. 5007 From: Amara Date: Sat Apr 28, 2001 7:04pm Subject: Re: Mr Amara -explain yourself mate --- J.L. wrote: > Mr Amara > Hi,I am a new member.I am woundering maybe I have joined the wrong > group, I have never heard such rude and slanderous speach before, I > hope you are not a buddhist Monk, I am just learning Buddhism and I > dont like what I read in your post. could you please explain what on > earth is going on > with Metta > J.L. > PS > I also have read a little about Thai Forest Monks from Insite to > Buddhism, I think they a good monks, why are you treating these > chappies so Bad Johnluke, If you're here to discuss the dhamma, you're in the right place. I am not a Buddhisht monk, and I do not represent this group. The list owners and moderators are not responsible for my posts which are my views alone. The post you have below was in answer to someone else's post which you might have agreed with, which is your prerogative, as it is mine to disagree, and yours not to agree with me. There is no rule here that we should all agree. I have the highest respect for monks who teach the dhamma and practice it. But there are also monks who do neither, so I do discriminate. I believe the heart of the Buddha's teachings is panna or right understanding, and forest or city monks who teach or accumulate that have my highest respect. What are you learning about Buddhism, may I ask, as one student to another? Anumodana to all those who study, Amara > --- "Amara" wrote: > > > > > Contarary to what you feel about all my past statements on Dhamma- > > > Vinaya. I assure you they are not my made up views. I do not > > > > classify > > > myself worthy to possess any view pertaining to the masters > Dhamma > > > Vinaya, other aspects yes to my fullest potential. For a long > time > > > now I have been using the views from some of your/our Greatest > Thai > > > Forest Buddhist Masters. > > > > Dear Marlon, > > > > I have never studied any other teachings but those of the Tipitaka, > > and do not wish to, whether they are Thai or not they are not mine > if > > they do not explain the Tipitaka or refute it in any way. > > > > > Nobody has caught on to this yet. Maybe > > > because most of you find them not worthy to be studied. They > spent a > > > lifetime experiencing true Dhamma, and they succeeded in > > > understanding it perfectly, because they had to live like the > Buddha > > > to experience the meaning of the Dhamma, not like some pleasure > > > filled Dhamma experts nowadays who churn out their own renditions > of > > > some of the Buddhas most Noble works from their own experiences > > which > > > amount to NOTHING. I beg to set the record straight before > someone > > > puts his noble foot into his noble mouth. > > > > The Buddha did not live in the forest all the time, he lived in > > mahaviharas the ruins of which you have yourself photographs of in > > your website, in the vicinity of the great cities where he taught > > kings and princes as well as leprous beggars. He did it was true > that > > he spent a lot of time in remote areas but his main purpose was, > after > > his enlightenment, to teach and he couldn't very well teach where > > there are no people. He spent most of the time, as one sees in the > > Tipitaka, or those of us who read it do, accepting alms and > teaching, > > not running off to sit alone in supposed beatitude as some people > > might have us think. Those who do that and claim to have led the > > Buddha's life and experienced the same thing should indeed study > the > > Tipitaka so that when they put their foot in their mouth they would > > know it instead of thinking others do without realizing the truth > in > > the Tipitaka. > > > > People who think they experience what the Buddha did without > knowing > > what he taught in the Tipitaka, without learning the dhamma as he > > taught even through the oral tradition would be like some monkeys I > > saw near some meditation centers where they see all the people > moving > > S_L_O_W_L_L_Y in silence and start to do the same. I suppose > they > > gain the same insight. > > > > On the contrary if one knows the nature of citta and cetasika, that > > panna or right understanding of things as they really are is the > only > > thing that can eradicate moha which is at the root of all kilesa, > and > > that panna like all other things except nibbana has to be > conditioned > > to arise, and how to condition panna with satipatthana, one could > live > > anywhere, as the Buddha did, even when he went to the heavenly > planes > > to teach. One could be a king and attain high levels of wisdom, or > be > > a slave and do the same. One does not have to become a forest monk > > and imitate the exterior image of the Buddha discounting what he > did > > after he became enlightened. Indeed those who imitated the wrong > > parts, such as when he fasted to the extreme before his attainment > > would be doing something he forbade others to do as futile exercise. > > > > > Your quote:--- > > > "". I know that I am the reason why I have > > > not yet escaped samsara, but I also know that panna alone would be > > > able to free me, when accumulated to a certain level. Panna would > > > then, as the Buddha taught, perform its function whether there is > > > 'commitment that is required' of us or not. To 'want' to do > > something > > > without right understanding and study could never end kilesa, > rather > > > the opposite. I don't know if it is to return home, but taking > > refuge > > > in his teachings is what I am most comfortable with, anyone > taking a > > > long journey home to the beginning of time has my best wishes and > > 'bon > > > voyage'!-----Amara > > > > > > My Reply to you:--- > > > Pertaining to your view on "commitment". This breaches > fundamental > > > Basic Buddhist Doctrine. "Commitment" is the vehicle for you to > seek > > > Panna (wisdom). Panna is an on going process, it doesen't come to > > you > > > all at once, or am I to presume that in your case you are > different. > > > Your presumption that Panna (wisdom) alone without commitment > will > > > allow you to be free ( I presume you mean Nivarna) is difficult > to > > > accept as it goes against the view of a multitude of Scholars, > data > > > too numerous for me to list. Or may I presume you actually meant > it > > > in a totally different context. > > > > I do not expect anyone to accept anything, there are zillions of > > beings who are not Buddhists. But this is what the Buddha taught > in > > the Tipitaka, if anyone cared to study it. The sukkhavipassaka > attain > > nibbana through panna alone and not through jhana. If you do not > > believe the Tipitaka that is your problem, you and your forest > > dwellers could perhaps start a new religion, perhaps the forest > > dwelling sect or something. Actually a lot of the bhikkhus in the > > Buddha's time were forest dwellers, but they had the accumulations > > which, after the basics have been learnt, could develop > satipatthana > > along with other kusala. Nowadays people make a big thing about > such > > life which was common back then, besides the fact that there are > fewer > > forests now. And most could not tell when they are attached to the > > subtle lobha for sitting and expecting unusual things to happen > which > > they immediately cling to as something good ordinary people don't > get > > to see. But is there any real knowledge of things as they really > are > > at that time? Of sight as sight, of seeing as seeing, of sound as > > sound, not color, of hearing at that moment? Is there knowledge of > > nama as nama or rupa as rupa? After that can they tell without > > uncertainty what is the manodvara like? If not, others than > > experiencing some strange and ultimately useless things, and even > > harmful ones if one clings to it and develop even more lobha > without > > being conscious of it, what knowledge is gained in the least? What > > kusala citta? > > > > Those who developed jhana in the old days before the Buddha taught > > them how to do it with vipassana, at least knew what kusala citta > were > > and how to develop it. Nowadays just about anyone can imitate the > > gestures and postures, but few could attain the same panna even if > > only at the jhana level. I don't care what a person says, if he > > doesn't agree with the Tipitaka, or who he is or was, after all, > > Devadata who was perhaps foremost in wrong view, was also a bhikkhu > in > > the Buddhist order, as I said in a previous post. > > > > Amara > > > > > Amara,Pertaining to your quote ""anyone taking a long journey > home > > to > > > the beginning of time has my best wishes and 'bon voyage'" > > > "Ven S Dhammika on being asked the question on his definition of > > > Nirvana had this to say? > > > ""It is a dimension transcending time and space and thus is > > difficult > > > to talk about or even think about. Words and thoughts being only > > > suited to describe the time-space dimension. But because Nirvana > is > > > beyond time, there is no movement and so no ageing or dying. Thus > > > Nirvana is eternal because it is beyond space, there is no > boundary, > > > no concept of Self and not-self and thus Nirvana is infinite.-- > Ven > > S > > > Dhammika 5008 From: Erik Date: Sat Apr 28, 2001 7:08pm Subject: Re: Can Arahants Die --- "Amara" wrote: > --- Erik wrote: > > --- "Amara" wrote: > > > I'm quite impressed with > > > your quest for knowledge even though at times I do not agree with > > your > > > methods of acquisition. > > > > I am curious which methods of acquisition you disagree with. > > Comparing systems, for example? > > > Nothing wrong with comparing systems, but false accusations remain a > kind of musavada. Can kindly point me to a single instance where you feel I have made a false accusation? I find this suggestion I have spoken falsely quite surprising. That's a serious accusation in itself, Amara, especially when you accuse another Dharma practitioner. This is not something you want to be wrong about. I find what you've said here especially suprising given I haven't observed any deeds motivated through that particular akusala-kamma-patha in some years now. 5009 From: Amara Date: Sat Apr 28, 2001 7:52pm Subject: Re: Can Arahants Die --- Erik wrote: > --- "Amara" wrote: > > --- Erik wrote: > > > --- "Amara" wrote: > > > > I'm quite impressed with > > > > your quest for knowledge even though at times I do not agree > with > > > your > > > > methods of acquisition. > > > > > > I am curious which methods of acquisition you disagree with. > > > Comparing systems, for example? > > > > > > Nothing wrong with comparing systems, but false accusations remain > a > > kind of musavada. > > Can kindly point me to a single instance where you feel I have made a > false accusation? I find this suggestion I have spoken falsely quite > surprising. That's a serious accusation in itself, Amara, especially > when you accuse another Dharma practitioner. This is not something > you want to be wrong about. I find what you've said here especially > suprising given I haven't observed any deeds motivated through that > particular akusala-kamma-patha in some years now. Anumodana, then, if it were true, which only you would know. I would suggest you reread message 4102. Of course that's past and over with, but as it is I am not obliged to answer any of your messages, and will not any further if I think it is full of false accusations, I am here to study the dhamma and not put up with petty bickering, so you can write anything you wish from now on and if I don't think it condones to kusala and panna I will not reply, which is my privilege. I had hoped your studies could lead you to kusala and panna and it seems I could do nothing to help, only condition more kusala, so our correspondence should end here. Whether you reply to this or not will have the same effect, I myself will try to accumulate more right understanding and kusala and I am sure you will do the same. 5010 From: Amara Date: Sat Apr 28, 2001 7:58pm Subject: Re: Abhidhamma, Khun Sujin, and My Practice > It's nice to have cyber buddies but I never accept directions from > someone who is pointing me down their own path. They don't understand > yet ...... > > > With lovingkindness > (Don't you think the English has a ring to it:-) > > > Herman Dear Herman, I agree with you entirely, no one should ever be a copycat. The only one whose path I would even examine the directions to is the Buddha. And he always taught us never to believe even his own teachings without careful consideration. Amara > --- Howard wrote: > > Dear Mike - > > > > My heart really goes out to you. I have no doubt that that > you are > > quite mistaken and that you have NOT wasted thirty years. For some > reason, > > you have been driven to what I see as extreme conclusions. Please > remember > > that the Buddha's path is a *middle* path. Please don't take the > view that > > progress must either be total or nil. You CAN get there from here! > With the > > right, fortunate experiences, it is possible to gain GREAT > confidence. With > > appropriate samatha training, it IS possible to reach jhanic > states. (I KNOW > > this for a fact.) With appropriate vipassana training, it IS > possible to > > glimpse the unreality of self in the person and in "things" and to > gain > > enormous confidence in the Buddha's way. (I know THAT for a fact as > well.) > > Please don't despair. There is really so much of value here - so > much that > > really IS possible. Try sometime a Goenka retreat - I found that > that gave me > > enormous confidence in the Dhamma. I only went to one, but it was > wonderful. > > > > With metta, > > Howard > > > > In a message dated 4/27/01 1:45:02 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > > "m. nease" writes: > > > > > > > Dear Howard, > > > > > > You're so much better informed than I am, and so much > > > better-spoken. My heart really goes out to you with > > > this post, and it inspires me to post several > > > tentative and extremely discouraging conclusions I've > > > painfully and gradually come to myself. I hope you > > > don't mind my piggy-backing on your MUCH more > > > thoughtful post. > > > > > > 1. Everything I ever thought I knew or understood > > > about the Dhamma is completely wrong. > > > 2. There is no kusala kamma except sammasati of the > > > eightfold path, which arises only with the stages of > > > enlightenment. > > > 3. There is no intervening practice between total > > > ignorance and stream-entry, except, apparently, > > > hearing the Dhamma (which can only happen totally > > > passively, as the present result of past intentions) > > > and reading the Abhidhamma and commentaries (and > > > certain authors). > > > 4. Even if there were other practices, they would be > > > impossible because of anatta and anicca. > > > 5. There are no Four Noble Truths (therefore no > > > Eightfold Path) except for ariyans. > > > 6. All effort (except by ariyans) is either akusala or > > > incomprehensible. > > > 7. All samatha practices, therefore all suttas > > > referring to them are obsolete. > > > 8. Although the sense of self is not eradicated until > > > total enlightenment, any understanding, thought, > > > speech, action, livelihood, effort, mindfulness or > > > concentration accompanied by a sense of self is > > > akusala, micchaditthi and completely unrelated to the > > > Eightfold Path. > > > 9. There is no such thing as skilful reflection except > > > by ariyans. Any idea that I can understand any > > > exhortation or reflection of the Buddha is ipso facto > > > akusala and micchaditthi. > > > 10. Anything I imagine I can think, say or do is > > > akusala and micchaditthi. > > > 11. Anything kusala thought to be arising > > > subjectively, even if consciously unaccompanied by the > > > idea of a self conditioning it, is necessarily akusala > > > and micchaditthi unless it can be directly perceived > > > as nama or rupa--i.e., by an Ariyan. > > > 12. Any hope of any kind of progress, ever, is a > > > delusion. There is no path to the cessation of > > > suffering except for those on its very threshold. > > > > > > Sorry these aren't better organized. Just a few > > > tentative conclusions to thirty years' wasted time, > > > off the top of my head. > > > > > > mike > > > 5011 From: craig garner Date: Sat Apr 28, 2001 9:17pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Mr Amara -explain yourself mate To the Sangha, Love wisdom ,love compasion and may compasion always be with wisdom as siamese twins are. best wishes Craig 5012 From: <> Date: Sun Apr 29, 2001 4:48am Subject: Re: chanda, lobha, viriya, (ditthi if time!) There is an apparent contradiction in Narada's commentary on A.S. He writes, "Where there are Thina and Middha there is no viriya." In part, this is what I was basing my comment on. But A.S. lists viriya as a "fixed adjunct" that invariably arises in its assigned types of consciousness (viz., the akusala and kusala cittas). Apparently, this means that viriya arises in every kusala and akusala citta, contrary to what I wrote in my previous few messages. In that case, THANKS Sarah and Robert for straightening me out! This brings up an interesting question, though, about why Narada would write his comment. He was a wise and learned bhikkhu, and I don't think he would make such a silly error unless there's more to it than meets the eye. B. Bodhi (Comprehensive Manual of A.S.) writes: "Viriya is the state or action of one who is vigorous...Its proximate cause is a sense of urgency or... anything that stirs one to vigorous action." Vigorous action arising out of a sense of urgency just doesn't seem to apply to any kusala or akusala citta, in particular those with thina and middha. Is this because viriya means different things in different contexts? What is the more canonical take on "fixed adjunct"? Is this discussed in Dhammasangani? Or even Atthasalini? > > In particular, [viriya] doesn't arise with thina and middha. This, > > though, > > is just based on my recollection of the commentaries. I don't > > have a > > citation for you, but it certainly makes sense. > > I think it has yet to be decided whether it arises with all > akusala including thina and middha. 5013 From: Herman Date: Sun Apr 29, 2001 8:51am Subject: Re: Can Arahants Die Erik, What is the word for self-righteousness in Pali? I don't really want to know, it is a rhetorical question, designed, if possible, to trigger some reflection. Who , what are you in defense off? And how is it that this who/what you are in defense off requires this defense? Is friend Amara any less than friend Erik? With lovingkindness (the state of mind, not the word) Herman --- Erik wrote: > --- "Amara" wrote: > > --- Erik wrote: > > > --- "Amara" wrote: > > > > I'm quite impressed with > > > > your quest for knowledge even though at times I do not agree > with > > > your > > > > methods of acquisition. > > > > > > I am curious which methods of acquisition you disagree with. > > > Comparing systems, for example? > > > > > > Nothing wrong with comparing systems, but false accusations remain > a > > kind of musavada. > > Can kindly point me to a single instance where you feel I have made a > false accusation? I find this suggestion I have spoken falsely quite > surprising. That's a serious accusation in itself, Amara, especially > when you accuse another Dharma practitioner. This is not something > you want to be wrong about. I find what you've said here especially > suprising given I haven't observed any deeds motivated through that > particular akusala-kamma-patha in some years now. 5014 From: Herman Date: Sun Apr 29, 2001 9:00am Subject: Re: Mr Amara -explain yourself mate John Luke, You show some insight. Yes, you may indeed have joined the wrong group :-). The dislike wasn't in Amara's post. It was all in yourself. The solution will not come from Amara. It will come from yourself, or not at all. By the way, it is very unladylike to introduce yourself with a right hook and a swift kick to the gonads. What did you say your name was, mate? Herman --- J.L. wrote: > Mr Amara > Hi,I am a new member.I am woundering maybe I have joined the wrong > group, I have never heard such rude and slanderous speach before, I > hope you are not a buddhist Monk, I am just learning Buddhism and I > dont like what I read in your post. could you please explain what on > earth is going on > with Metta > J.L. > PS > I also have read a little about Thai Forest Monks from Insite to > Buddhism, I think they a good monks, why are you treating these > chappies so Bad > 5015 From: robert Date: Sun Apr 29, 2001 10:02am Subject: Re: chanda, lobha, viriya, (ditthi if time!) Dear Dan, Thanks for looking this up.Comments below. --- Dan wrote: > There is an apparent contradiction in Narada's commentary on A.S. He > writes, "Where there are Thina and Middha there is no viriya." In > part, this is what I was basing my comment on. But A.S. lists viriya > as a "fixed adjunct" that invariably arises in its assigned types of > consciousness (viz., the akusala and kusala cittas). Apparently, this > means that viriya arises in every kusala and akusala citta, contrary > to what I wrote in my previous few messages. In that case, THANKS > Sarah and Robert for straightening me out! > > This brings up an interesting question, though, about why Narada would > write his comment. He was a wise and learned bhikkhu, and I don't > think he would make such a silly error unless there's more to it than > meets the eye. B. Bodhi (Comprehensive Manual of A.S.) writes: "Viriya > is the state or action of one who is vigorous...Its proximate cause is > a sense of urgency or... anything that stirs one to vigorous action." > Vigorous action arising out of a sense of urgency just doesn't seem to > apply to any kusala or akusala citta, in particular those with thina > and middha. Is this because viriya means different things in different > contexts? What is the more canonical take on "fixed adjunct"? Is this > discussed in Dhammasangani? Or even Atthasalini? I haven't looked up what it said in the Abhidhammatthasangaha so will just make some tentative observations based on the discussion so far. Fixed adjunct will mean just that: that it arises will all those type of cittas. As I said earlier, in the atthasalini when they refer to viriya most often they are referring to viriya which accompanies kusala citta so we get such phrases as "from its overcoming idleness it is a controlling factor in the sense of predominace"p158. This phrase supports the idea that it could not arise with sloth; BUT note that it is in the chapter "MORAL(kusala) consciousness in the worlds of sense" thus kusala viriya is assumed here. Perhaps Narada based his thoughts on these type of references. I have found, and you may too, that even respected scholars and practioners can make errors. One example, I found ledi sayadaw excellent on many aspects of Dhamma but later found that occasionally he would depart from the very ancient commentaries. I think these are the times when even laypeople have to investigate and consider and discuss difficult Dhamma themselves. It is not that we simply believe it if it is said by an important teacher. Acharn Sujin is famous now in Thailand but I notice when they have the meetings in the big hall that subtle questions are openly discussed by a panel, and the audience too has input. When it comes to very subtle points on practice they especially look to Sujin but on an interpretation of a pali term other members are often consulted. Even this is no guarantee. Nor is it that even if we find a reference in the ancient commentary that that is the end of the matter. It has to be considered in relation to the Tipitaka and also to this moment. It probably seems strange to think of feeling drowsy with energy (viriya) present. Then again consider when sleeping and some very active dream is occurring - we can see that viriya is present then. When we read the lists in the Dhammasaangani or abhidhammatthasangaha we might get the impression that say viriya is some fixed 'ingredient' that is just added in with other cetasikas. However, from the Patthana - the last book of the abhidhamma - we learn that "moments" are highly dynamic with influences from past and present factors. And no moment is identical with another. It is true that such dhammas as viriya or vedana are classified under the same heading but the actual quality is influenced by so many diverse factiors that not even one moment of feeling (or viriya)is exactly the same. When feeling drowsy viriya is likely not of the same degree as when one is very intent and interested in something. When viriya is an indriya, controlling faculty, it becomes powerful and predominant. These are just some considerations, not the end of the matter. I am sure in Thailand this would have been thoroughly explained - it is all much easier there I find. One can meet so many knowledgeable and helpful friends. robert 5016 From: Bill Sims Date: Sun Apr 29, 2001 1:13pm Subject: Re: Mr Amara -explain yourself mate Ladies and Gentleman Something has gone dreadfully wrong here. I only sense anger and unskilled thoughts from everyone. The display of anger is contrary to Buddhist practice of Dhamma. Buddhism does not teach us to display anger when faced with adversity of views. How can we call ourselves true Buddhists when we display such outwardly unskilled behavior. We must all analyze our ongoing behavior for our own good and the furtherance of Buddhism. Bill Sims --- Herman wrote: > John Luke, > > You show some insight. Yes, you may indeed have joined the wrong > group :-). > > The dislike wasn't in Amara's post. It was all in yourself. The > solution will not come from Amara. It will come from yourself, or not > at all. > > By the way, it is very unladylike to introduce yourself with a right > hook and a swift kick to the gonads. > > What did you say your name was, mate? > > Herman > > --- J.L. wrote: > > Mr Amara > > Hi,I am a new member.I am woundering maybe I have joined the wrong > > group, I have never heard such rude and slanderous speach before, I > > hope you are not a buddhist Monk, I am just learning Buddhism and I > > dont like what I read in your post. could you please explain what > on > > earth is going on > > with Metta > > J.L. > > PS > > I also have read a little about Thai Forest Monks from Insite to > > Buddhism, I think they a good monks, why are you treating these > > chappies so Bad > > 5017 From: Bill Sims Date: Sun Apr 29, 2001 4:45pm Subject: Re: Mr Amara -explain yourself mate HERMAN You sound like a puny little runt that runs around barking into neighbors gardens. Come teatime you will be curled up into a little ball and asleep at someones feet. Leave adult conversation to adults, I didn't see your name mentioned you in any way, you runt. BS --- Herman wrote: > John Luke, > > You show some insight. Yes, you may indeed have joined the wrong > group :-). > > The dislike wasn't in Amara's post. It was all in yourself. The > solution will not come from Amara. It will come from yourself, or not > at all. > > By the way, it is very unladylike to introduce yourself with a right > hook and a swift kick to the gonads. > > What did you say your name was, mate? > > Herman > 5019 From: Bill Sims Date: Sun Apr 29, 2001 5:22pm Subject: Re: Can Arahants Die-amara Hey Amara do you think you are a Arahant yet, you are trying to sound like one, or do you want to make people think that maybe you are one. I think you are a pimp. BS --- "Amara" wrote: > > Dear Herman, > > Panna is not wisdom to know things as they really are for nothing. > The arahanta would know they have reached that stage, although that > stage without kilesa is also without mana that makes them distinguish > their nama and rupa from the rest of nama and rupa. After each level > of attainment there is a nana that goes revues all the kilesa > eradicated and all that is left, so none of the ariya puggala could > ever mistake the level they are at and what there is left to > eradicate. > > Amara > > > Do Arahants know they are Arahants? Do Arahants know the fetters > they > > are not bound by? Do Arahants know their death? Can an observer know > > an Arahant? > > > > I answer all the above in the negative. Which is why I think that > the > > concept Arahant is not very useful (because it is not verifiable) > > (umless you have superpowers, which are also not verifiable). > > > > > > > > Kind Regards > > > > Herman > > > > 5020 From: Herman Date: Sun Apr 29, 2001 7:37pm Subject: Re: Mr Amara -explain yourself mate-Hermsn Dear Bill, I just want to acknowledge that I have read your post. I am choosing not to reply to it's content. Hope this finds you well. Kind Regards Herman --- Bill Sims wrote: > HERMAN > You sound like a puny little runt that runs around barking into > neighbors gardens. Come teatime you will be curled up into a little > ball and asleep at someones feet. Leave adult conversation to adults, > I didn't see your name mentioned you in any way, you runt. > > BS > 5021 From: Moderators Date: Sun Apr 29, 2001 8:15pm Subject: Moderator Warning Please note that any members who write abusive posts will have their messages moderated without notice. We apologise to all other members for any offence that may have been caused recently. DSG Moderators 5022 From: Joe Date: Sun Apr 29, 2001 8:46pm Subject: Re: pitaka gurudom Jon Thanks for your thoughtful reply. Joe --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Joe > > > Until panna confirms what one reads in the Tipitaka, > > you are dealing > > with theoretical constructs, at least as I > > understand the meaning > > of 'theory'. > > We may need to define terms here. Any teaching > purporting to be a declaration of absolute truths > which have been realised, and are realisable, by > direct experience would not fall within my > understanding of the term 'theoretical construct'. > (The inclusion of the factor of direct experience is > crucial in this regard.) > > Any of the Four Noble Truths, for > > example, like Newton's > > theory of gravitation, is a theory or hypothesis > > that can be tested. > > If you accept any statement in the pitakas without > > testing it, it is > > unconfirmed theory. Once tested, if it obtains then > > it's a confirmed > > theory (until another theory proves otherwise). > > I agree that the teachings can only be confirmed to > the extent that one's developed panna allows, and that > beyond that they can only be a working hypothesis > (thanks, Mike). HOwever, to the extent that they are > confirmed, they are realised in a sense that, say, > Newton's laws could never be (they being concepts). > > > I guess I didn't make the "I know what works for me" > > side clear. I > > was referring in particular to the post that said > > something like 'to > > hell with the written word,' which to me meant that > > view valued > > personal experience over scripture. Not that I > > sympathise with that > > point of view. > > Understood. Actually, Erik later clarified that > remark, to make it clear that it was not intended the > way we all took it. > > > Naturally, and that's my point, that none of us can > > point to one > > interpretation of the pitakas and say "This is the > > correct one." But > > there are DSG posters on this list who have implied > > that one > > particular interpretation they are acquainted with > > (or have > > discovered) is the correct one. > > You are right to point out the dangers of dogmatic > assertion. > > > > I am not sure what you mean by 'infallible' here, > > as > > > applied to the pitakas. Again, I would put the > > > question slightly differently -- whether the > > pitakas > > > are 100% the actual word of the Buddha. > > > > Then let me put it another way, so you can't slip > > out of the question > > so easily! How do you know the "actual word of the > > Buddha" is > > infallible? > > It is the *truths* taught by the Buddha that are said > to be infallible, and verifiable by any person for > themselves. I think there is danger in attaching the > label 'infallible' to a person's *words*, since words > are simply the medium by which the (purported) truths > are conveyed. > > How's that for slipping out of a question? > > > >Can there be > > > > an independent > > > > judge of the fruits of your practice? > > > > > > I don't believe so. > > > > Not even your reading of the Tipitaka? > > No. There is nothing independent about a person's > interpretation of someone else's words, especially > when those words are the basis for the person's > practice in the first place. > > > > My own approach is to test any expression of view > > > against the Tipitaka. To me, this is essential > > > because, due to the mass of our accumulated wrong > > > view, one's own 'experience' is on its own a most > > > unreliable and therefore dangerous guide. I don't > > > feel the need to make any apology for this > > approach > > > (nor are you suggesting that I should). But the > > fact > > > is, the teaching on any particular point can be > > > exceedingly difficult to discern, and lengthy and > > > rigorous study of the texts is often necessary. > > > > And how do you know you're understanding the texts > correctly? > > I think it is difficult to ever assert the one has > understood a text correctly. That's why the study of > the texts, and the application of the understanding > arising from that study, is a never-ending task. > > > > Joe, I won't ask you whether you can produce an > > actual > > > example from the archives of anyone on this list > > > making a similar claim! > > > > Well, you've as much as asked me now, haven't you? > > And I think I > > could produce one, actually -- but I wouldn't like > > to take it that > > far. > > Joe, thanks for ignoring my provocation. I am > probably one of the worst offenders in this regard! > > > > > Thus I can understand why some practitioners > > might > > > > place unwritten > > > > dharma transmission -- person to person > > > > transmission, as in Tibetan > > > > or Zen Buddhism and even among many Theravadins > > > > (those who follow > > > > this or that living teacher) -- above written > > > > transmission, > > > > especially when the latter can be complicated by > > > > differing > > > > translations, differing interpretations, 'lost' > > > > sutras, Sanskrit vs > > > > Pali sutras, cultural filters, persistent usage > > of > > > > undefined Pali > > > > terms, etc. > > > > > > That would imply, I suppose, that those people > > must > > > regard unwritten transmission as being more > > reliable > > > than written transmission? > > > > Exactly. The Kasyapa lineage, for example. > > I suppose the question of whether a written or an oral > tradition is more reliable is an open question, and so > not worth pursuing here. > > > > > Wherever you're placing your Pascalian wager -- > > on > > > > written or > > > > spoken/silent or a combination of the two -- one > > > > could argue that one > > > > is not receiving dharma directly from the > > Buddha, > > > > but from > > > > intermediary sources. This will always remain a > > > > tactical conundrum > > > > for Buddhist scholars, however strongly you may > > > > argue that the > > > > Tripitaka is the ultimate authority and that you > > > > have the only > > > > correct interpretation of it. > > > > > > The approach taken by most people in my experience > > is > > > that while the Tipitaka is the ultimate authority > > of > > > the Buddha's word as best we have it, it's > > > interpretation is very much a matter for inquiry > > and > > > discussion. I agree that there are times when > > > different views are robustly expressed, but this > > does > > > === message truncated === > > Saved by the truncation! If this has allowed me to > duck anything that I shouln't, please feel free to > draw my attention to it. > > Jon > > Ps Sorry to have missed you in Bangkok. Looking > forward to that pleasure on some future occasion. > > 5023 From: Howard Date: Sun Apr 29, 2001 4:54pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Can Arahants Die-amara Hi, Bill - I just read the following three posts from you: #1 Ladies and Gentleman Something has gone dreadfully wrong here. I only sense anger and unskilled thoughts from everyone. The display of anger is contrary to Buddhist practice of Dhamma. Buddhism does not teach us to display anger when faced with adversity of views. How can we call ourselves true Buddhists when we display such outwardly unskilled behavior. We must all analyze our ongoing behavior for our own good and the furtherance of Buddhism. Bill Sims #2 HERMAN You sound like a puny little runt that runs around barking into neighbors gardens. Come teatime you will be curled up into a little ball and asleep at someones feet. Leave adult conversation to adults, I didn't see your name mentioned you in any way, you #3 Hey Amara do you think you are a Arahant yet, you are trying to sound like one, or do you want to make people think that maybe you are one. I think you are a pimp. BS ============================== Are numbers 2 and 3 really from you? If yes, would you please explain what you are trying to do here? Is this an attempt at humor or irony? This is not the list for this sort of posting. You might try the newsgroups instead. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 5024 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Sun Apr 29, 2001 9:01pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello from a new member Hi Wafik, I wrote a message to you a couple of days ago to welcome you to the list, but I think it got lost somewhere in cyberspace (happens to me too,Amara!!) I'm so glad you're enjoying the messages on theravada. Pls let us know if you have any questions or comments. I've sorry, but I can't help you with your question below, but I'd be interested to hear anything you care to share about your background and interest in Buddhism. May I ask where you are from, too?? Best rgds, Sarah --- Wafik wrote: > Hello everybody in this Group, > > I really appreciate all the messages posted and the > wide knowledge of > Theravada Buddhism evident in the messages. > > For about a year now I've been reading a lot about > Theravada Buddhism > and Vipassana. I'm also planning to go on a > meditation retreat in > Myanmar this July. Did anybody go there? Probably > you can give me > some tips. I'm now at the stage of contacting a > Myanmar embassy via e- > mail for a meditation visa. I've got no answer so > far. > > with metta > > Wafik > 5025 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Apr 29, 2001 9:03pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Abhidhamma, Khun Sujin, and My Practice Mike I was sorry to read about your discouragement. I am sure it is unfounded. I don't propose to go through your points, because I think in your frustration you have deliberately overstated your conclusions! I would, however, like to encourage you to keep considering the points made in posts and to test anything said here against the texts of the Tipitaka, a source which you are more familiar with than just about anyone else on the list. Mike, it is not unnatural to have doubt about the teachings, and also self-doubt and other unpleasant mental states. As long as we are not enlightened we will continue to do so. I am sure your sentiments are shared by others on the list too from time to time. Also, as long as we continue to study the teachings there will be times when we come to realise that our understanding is not correct in some respect or other - this after all is how progress is made along the path. To look on the positive side, any realisation of our own inadequacies can, as Num has pointed out, be a sign of maturity of understanding. I do hope nothing I have said has contributed unnecessarily to your confusion. Please feel free to say if that is so. Jon --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Howard, > > You're so much better informed than I am, and so > much > better-spoken. My heart really goes out to you with > this post, and it inspires me to post several > tentative and extremely discouraging conclusions > I've > painfully and gradually come to myself. I hope you > don't mind my piggy-backing on your MUCH more > thoughtful post. > > 1. Everything I ever thought I knew or understood > about the Dhamma is completely wrong. > 2. There is no kusala kamma except sammasati of the > eightfold path, which arises only with the stages of > enlightenment. > 3. There is no intervening practice between total > ignorance and stream-entry, except, apparently, > hearing the Dhamma (which can only happen totally > passively, as the present result of past intentions) > and reading the Abhidhamma and commentaries (and > certain authors). > 4. Even if there were other practices, they would be > impossible because of anatta and anicca. > 5. There are no Four Noble Truths (therefore no > Eightfold Path) except for ariyans. > 6. All effort (except by ariyans) is either akusala > or > incomprehensible. > 7. All samatha practices, therefore all suttas > referring to them are obsolete. > 8. Although the sense of self is not eradicated > until > total enlightenment, any understanding, thought, > speech, action, livelihood, effort, mindfulness or > concentration accompanied by a sense of self is > akusala, micchaditthi and completely unrelated to > the > Eightfold Path. > 9. There is no such thing as skilful reflection > except > by ariyans. Any idea that I can understand any > exhortation or reflection of the Buddha is ipso > facto > akusala and micchaditthi. > 10. Anything I imagine I can think, say or do is > akusala and micchaditthi. > 11. Anything kusala thought to be arising > subjectively, even if consciously unaccompanied by > the > idea of a self conditioning it, is necessarily > akusala > and micchaditthi unless it can be directly perceived > as nama or rupa--i.e., by an Ariyan. > 12. Any hope of any kind of progress, ever, is a > delusion. There is no path to the cessation of > suffering except for those on its very threshold. > > Sorry these aren't better organized. Just a few > tentative conclusions to thirty years' wasted time, > off the top of my head. > > mike 5026 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Sun Apr 29, 2001 9:20pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Mr Amara -explain yourself mate Dear John, I'm sure that if you are sincerely wishing to study more about Buddhism then this is certainly the right place to be and we will all do our best to help you. As with any teaching, religion, philosophy or way of life, there are bound to be different understandings, views and interpretations. I believe it's very useful to discuss these and to help each other learn more. Indeed this is the very purpose of this group here. I re-read the message you referred to by Amara, a Thai lady and good friend of mine. As anyone who follows this list knows, we usually agree, but sometimes disagree on points of dhamma and are not afraid to point this out! In this case, although some of her comments to Marlon may have been considered by some as being too direct, I fail to see how they could be perceived in quite the way you describe, but that doesn't mean I'm right and you're wrong!! Anyway, I hope you enjoy other messages on the list and feel free to ask any questions. Please would you tell us a little about your background and interest in Buddhism and where you live too. Best rgds, Sarah --- J.L. wrote: > Mr Amara > Hi,I am a new member.I am woundering maybe I have > joined the wrong > group, I have never heard such rude and slanderous > speach before, I > hope you are not a buddhist Monk, I am just learning > Buddhism and I > dont like what I read in your post. could you please > explain what on > earth is going on > with Metta > J.L. > PS > I also have read a little about Thai Forest Monks > from Insite to > Buddhism, I think they a good monks, why are you > treating these > chappies so Bad > > --- "Amara" > wrote: > > > > > Contarary to what you feel about all my past > statements on Dhamma- > > > Vinaya. I assure you they are not my made up > views. I do not > > > > classify > > > myself worthy to possess any view pertaining to > the masters > Dhamma > > > Vinaya, other aspects yes to my fullest > potential. For a long > time > > > now I have been using the views from some of > your/our Greatest > Thai > > > Forest Buddhist Masters. > > > > Dear Marlon, > > > > I have never studied any other teachings but those > of the Tipitaka, > > and do not wish to, whether they are Thai or not > they are not mine > if > > they do not explain the Tipitaka or refute it in > any way. > > > > > Nobody has caught on to this yet. Maybe > > > because most of you find them not worthy to be > studied. They > spent a > > > lifetime experiencing true Dhamma, and they > succeeded in > > > understanding it perfectly, because they had to > live like the > Buddha > > > to experience the meaning of the Dhamma, not > like some pleasure > > > filled Dhamma experts nowadays who churn out > their own renditions > of > > > some of the Buddhas most Noble works from their > own experiences > > which > > > amount to NOTHING. I beg to set the record > straight before > someone > > > puts his noble foot into his noble mouth. > > > > The Buddha did not live in the forest all the > time, he lived in > > mahaviharas the ruins of which you have yourself > photographs of in > > your website, in the vicinity of the great cities > where he taught > > kings and princes as well as leprous beggars. He > did it was true > that > > he spent a lot of time in remote areas but his > main purpose was, > after > > his enlightenment, to teach and he couldn't very > well teach where > > there are no people. He spent most of the time, > as one sees in the > > Tipitaka, or those of us who read it do, accepting > alms and > teaching, > > not running off to sit alone in supposed beatitude > as some people > > might have us think. Those who do that and claim > to have led the > > Buddha's life and experienced the same thing > should indeed study > the > > Tipitaka so that when they put their foot in their > mouth they would > > know it instead of thinking others do without > realizing the truth > in > > the Tipitaka. > > > > People who think they experience what the Buddha > did without > knowing > > what he taught in the Tipitaka, without learning > the dhamma as he > > taught even through the oral tradition would be > like some monkeys I > > saw near some meditation centers where they see > all the people > moving > > S_L_O_W_L_L_Y in silence and start to do the > same. I suppose > they > > gain the same insight. > > > > On the contrary if one knows the nature of citta > and cetasika, that > > panna or right understanding of things as they > really are is the > only > > thing that can eradicate moha which is at the root > of all kilesa, > and > > that panna like all other things except nibbana > has to be > conditioned > > to arise, and how to condition panna with > satipatthana, one could > live > > anywhere, as the Buddha did, even when he went to > the heavenly > planes > > to teach. One could be a king and attain high > levels of wisdom, or > be > > a slave and do the same. One does not have to > become a forest monk > > and imitate the exterior image of the Buddha > discounting what he > did > > after he became enlightened. Indeed those who > imitated the wrong > > parts, such as when he fasted to the extreme > before his attainment > > would be doing something he forbade others to do > as futile exercise. 5027 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Sun Apr 29, 2001 9:30pm Subject: p.s. Dear Dan, Rob, Howard, Num, Kom,Erik and everyone else, have you all in mind and I note there are lots of good meaty posts to catch up on (hopefully tomorrow)....we've had some really super discussions in Bkk (live ones) w/ Khun Sujin and friends and hope to get back with some appetisers tomorrow..... Hope the list is back to 'normal' by then too!! Sarah 5028 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Apr 30, 2001 2:37pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: 'Vajrayana' Erik Thanks for your detailed explanation. It helps me to understand where some of our members are coming from. My immediate reaction is, to return to an earlier thread raised by you, that this is an area of definite departure between the Mahayana and the Therevada traditions. The concept of 'black deeds [being] transformed by panna into the purest and most indestructible substance known to man' would seem to contradict the teachings on kamma and vipaka. Likewise, the concept of a source or kind of kusala outside those enumerated in the suttas would also be contradictory. To particlarise, if tantric bliss is kusala, what kind of kusala citta is it and what is its object? =============== Erik: Anyway, I hope you find this of some use. It will hopefully better help you and I continue our conversations (and debates!) as well. ================= Yes, I'm sure it will. Funny thing about our debates though, Erik. They usually die at an early stage, with me waiting for an answer from you. The latest example of this was my recent request for your explanation of the term 'vipassana' as used in the context of a statement you made. I seem to recall other examples (eg. the meaning of the Eightfold Path as found in the Mahayana texts). Jon --- Erik wrote: > Jonothan Abbott > wrote: > > Erik > > > > > I was lucky in this regard: Zen short-circuited > that > > > temptation for > > > me, because I came to Vajrayana after having > been > > > well-established in > > > the core of the Dharma. Anyway, you can't be > > > "vajrayanic." It is > > > either what you are (physiologically) or it is > not. > > > You can't choose > > > it; it chooses you. > > > > I've not come across the term 'vajrayana' before. > > Would you mind giving a short explanation? > Thanks. > > Vajrayana literally means 'diamond vehicle,' the > appellation applied > to the form of Buddhism that arose in India and was > well-represented > (fairly dominant even I beleive) from the 8th > century on in various > monasteries like Nalanada (the Mahasiddha Naropa is > the root lineage- > holder of the Tibetan Kagyu and Geluk and Sakya > schools, and Naropa > was abbot of Nalanda). These teachings in particular > include that > various tantras. It seems all these practices arose > in a real > hothouse environment of the time in India. I am not > even close to > being a historian though, so please take this with a > grain of salt, > as it's to the best of my recollection. > > The etymology: Vajra is Sanskrit for 'diamond' as I > assume many here > are aware. Vajra also has many many deeper meanings > in Tibetan, where > it is known as Do-rJe (dorje), which literally means > 'Lord of > Stones'. > > One thing this symbolizes is the "adamantine wisdom" > of ongoing > realization. The Vajra is also symbolizes the > thunderbolt, which > represents the flash of insight that arises with > realization of > anicca, dukkha, and anatta. The dorje is also the > implement of Indra > (as well as the Tibetan version of Indra, > Vajrapani). Another meaning > I devised for this from my own painful experience is > fact that > there's only one known way to make a diamond, and > that's enormous > heat and pressure applied for a VERY long time. This > is very true in > tantra. When Kundalini (prana/chi) is activated > either through > natural ripening or forced with tantric energy > yogas, it's like being > tossed into a purificatory alchemical fire where > akusala kamma is > consumed, and black deeds are transformed by panna > into the purest > and most indestructible substance known to man. > > Since you asked, perhaps it would be helpful to > explain a bit about > tantric theory, since it a source of great confusion > for many people. > I have debated a LOT internally about the > justification and need for > tantra given the Buddha did not explicitly teach it > in the suttas. > And, the fact is, there is not a hair of difference > between the > understanding of the Four Noble Truths and anicca, > dukkha, and anatta > in the Tibetan Buddhadharma between what is taught > in the Theravada. > The agreement on this between systems--and I can say > this having > received correct teachings from teachers in both > lineages--is 100%, > even though presentations of the same thing differ > markedly, the > Tibetan relying largely on Nagarjuna's "Root > Treatise on the Middle > Way" (Mulamadhyamakakarika) for its presentation of > anatta, in this > case described as emptiness. > > I came to the conclusion that tantra is essential > for some people, > simply because of physiological makeup. If the > Kundalini starts > functioning you HAVE to deal with it. There is > simply no choice, > beacuse it can precipitate all sorts of really nasty > side-effects if > one is not prepared for it. So it's not even a > matter of preference > for many people, but a real necessity. Failing to > properly harness > and control activated Kundalini can lead to serious > psychological and > even physical problems, the worst recorded examples > being insanity > and death. (One reason tantra is called "walking the > razor's edge"). > > Tantric theory derives from the function of the > "prana" or life > energy that circulates in the body, the same thing > as taught in both > Traditional Chinese Medicine and Indian Ayurvedic > medicine, and > central to this physiological understanding are the > "chakras." Indian > tantrikas, both Buddhist and Hindu, discovered that > through certain > types of hatha yoga emphasizing breath control and > visualzation, one > can engender states of "inconceivable" bliss. Bliss > that has one very > interesting property: it somehow does NOT act as a > condition for > lobha. In other words, there is no clinging to this > type of bliss > generated in the practice of tantra. Another > interesting property of > this bliss is that it thoroughly pacifies the > nivaranas and acts as a > foundation for directly realizing emptiness (anatta) > when it arises > in meditation. > > The aim of tantric Buddhism is to harness this > capacity for bliss > built into this fathom-long body to open the door to > liberation. This > bliss is considered akin to nulclear fusion energy > as well, because > after a certain point it becomes self-sustaining in > terms of > engendering unstoppable bliss that supports acts of > virtue and > enables one to accumulate vast reserves of kusala > kamma, which is > taught to be necessary for attaining Buddhahood in > this lifetime. > When the Kundalini is fully activated this way, > there is the free > flow of prana throughout the body, but most > important through > the "heart chakra." Kundalini "bliss" effects are > all lokiya, and as > such are not confused with lokuttara realizations. > > This condition of fully awakened Kundalini is known > as a "tantric > paradise" or "pure land" and this is attained IN > THIS BODY. > This "tantric paradise" then serves as the > foundation for attaining > Buddhahood in the same lifetime. This tantric > paradise means that one > is inhabiting a state of perpetual > bliss-consciousness in this body. > This is supposed to be a very nice place to work out > one's final > liberation, because dukkha is strongly pacified > (though not > terminated, which is as always only via lokuttara > nana) by this > attainment. > > And just a note: Buddhahood is NOT "coming back > again and again" or > in direct contradiction to anything taught in the > Tripitaka about > final realization. It is still the blowing out of > the defilements, > though through a somewhat different strategy. The > final result is > still lokuttara, in other words--no god-realms, > atman, or any of that > some folks believe. I have been saddened by some of > the distortions > I've seen from people who should be much more > thorough in > investigating things they wish to criticize. I see > basic === message truncated === 5029 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Mon Apr 30, 2001 2:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: chanda, lobha, viriya, (ditthi if time!) Dear Dan & Rob, Thanks for all your comments and considerations.... Yes, after I wrote my original post, I checked it out pretty carefully before posting, but after the comments about the 'dry' list, I was trying to keep it from being too academic! I don't have any texts w/me of course, but I think (as I mentioned to Num when we were talking about sanna)the problem is that we have a conventional idea about energy or laziness, to give 2 examples, and furthermore we're very used to taking them for self as well. Viriya energizes or 'cheers on' (o.k. I'll drop cheerleader) the citta to cognize or be conscious of its object and the other cetasikas to perform their functions regardless of whether they are kusala or akusala, and regardless, in conventional language, as to whether they seem to be energetic or lazy ones...As we have discussed, the nture of the viriya is different at each moment, depending on the other 'ingredients' it is combined with, but I don't see that we can say it is stronger or weaker depending on whether it is accompanied by sati or acompanied by thina and middha (sloth & torpor) for example. --- Dan wrote: > There is an apparent contradiction in Narada's > commentary on A.S. He > writes, "Where there are Thina and Middha there is > no viriya." In > part, this is what I was basing my comment on. But > A.S. lists viriya > as a "fixed adjunct" that invariably arises in its > assigned types of > consciousness (viz., the akusala and kusala cittas). yes > Apparently, this > means that viriya arises in every kusala and akusala > citta, contrary > to what I wrote in my previous few messages. In that > case, THANKS > Sarah and Robert for straightening me out! We're all here to keep straightening each other out...nothing easy about it!! Your careful consideration helps a lot! > > This brings up an interesting question, though, > about why Narada would > write his comment. He was a wise and learned > bhikkhu, and I don't > think he would make such a silly error unless > there's more to it than > meets the eye. B. Bodhi (Comprehensive Manual of > A.S.) writes: "Viriya > is the state or action of one who is vigorous...Its > proximate cause is > a sense of urgency or... anything that stirs one to > vigorous action." > Vigorous action arising out of a sense of urgency > just doesn't seem to > apply to any kusala or akusala citta, in particular > those with thina > and middha. For me, this is a little misleading, or perhaps that depends on how one u'stands action. Flat out, unable to move with dosa, say, and yet there is a sense of urgency which stirs, not one, but the citta to be fixed on the object at that moment too. Is this because viriya means different > things in different > contexts? Although the exact characteristic of all cetasikas (and any other realitye) is different at each moment,generally speaking, the function, nature, proximate cause etc are the same. Dan, I always enjoy reading your posts, and look f/w to hearing more. Btw, they tell me it's hot, very hot in Bangkok, but I haven't noticed it yet....I swim early in the morning, dive into air-conditoned rooms like this in the middle of the day and avoid any unnecessary 'running around'....Even today (Rob may be shocked to hear) we've given up a trip with Khun Sujin to relax quietly under the palm trees and catch up with you guys! I like to have time to consider what I've heard and we have one more 'party' tomorrow with her. Speak soon, Sarah 5030 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Mon Apr 30, 2001 3:03pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Abhidhamma, Khun Sujin, and My Practice Hi Howard, This was interesting too... --- Howard wrote: > Hi, all (especially Amara) - > > I've been looking over the "Summary" again, > particularly the articles > on Samatha and Vipassana. .............................................. > I suspect that this post may be disappointing > to a number of you, and, > for that, I am most regretful. Please do understand > that I have come to learn > more about Abhidhamma and to have greater repect for > it than ever, since > being on this list. I do, indeed, intend to continue > a serious study of it, > and I would very much like to continue to > participate in discussions of it > and other matters on the list. I hope you don't mind that I've 'truncated' all the meat out of your neat message. Just a couple (actually, no idea how many as yet) of brief comments: 1. I doubt anyone would be disappointed to hear that you find this book is not such easy reading!! 2. It's certainly not compulsory reading for these discussions! 3. There are no rules about what Buddhist books or texts we all read, how we read them or in what order. 4. Unlike Num & Rob and the other bright larks that have the capacity and accumulations to read abhidhamma and other texts from cover to cover, I'm more like a slug or snail that takes its time.....I dip in here and there (actually, maybe I'm more a woodpecker, Num), go forwards, backwards and sideways...What I have always been able to do, however, is to consider pretty carefully what I read or hear. 5. At one of the discussions with Khun Sujin and also under the palm trees by the pool, I've been dipping into Nina's translation of the same book (can be downloaded from Zolag or abhidhamm.org websites). This is not such a literal translation and she also adds a lot of very helpful notes. You may find it easier reading. One problem, though, is that the original Thai book was written from lectures and so it is very difficult to translate and quite an undetrtaking by both Amara and Nina. 6. Even when we were looking at it together with Khun Sujin (thanks Betty), we were skipping over the intro, jumping to Ch3 and then reading a little and discussing what we'd read....abhidhamma is here and now, not just in the text. K.S. kept reminding us that we should remember the purpose when we study or read or discuss the details: it should be to understand more about the realities appearing in our lives right now!! So, Howard, enjoy reading whatever you find useful and interesting and share anything you like! Maybe time for another dip in the pool...After all it is a holiday (thanks to today being Buddha's birthday in Hong Kong although it's not 'til next week in Bkk). Sarah 5032 From: Amara Date: Mon Apr 30, 2001 3:21pm Subject: Re: Can Arahants Die Dear all, I'm sorry I forgot to give the source of the information in the reply below, which is in the 'Summary of Paramatthadhamma' the chapter on vipassana in the advanced section of from which I quote: Paccavekkhana-nana: the sixteenth vipassana-nana After the magga-vithi-citta has fallen away, the bhavanga-citta would arise in continuation after which the mano-dvara-vithi-citta would arise and examine the reality that has just been fully realized process by process, one examining the instant of magga-citta, another the phala-citta, another the kilesa that has been eradicated, still another the remaining kilesa and finally nibbana. For those who attain arahanta-magga and arahata-phala, there is no examination of the rest of the kilesa because the arahanta-magga-citta eradicates all the kilesa completely, without any remnants. (End quote) It is normal to have doubts or uncertainties when this nana has not arisen, to know things exactly. But even after any level of attainment, it is forbidden for the person to declare their achievement although they realize the truth fully. That only the Buddha could do for anyone. This is in the vinaya. The Dhamma can be taught or discussed by anyone, while the pacceka Buddha might not teach at all, although he is an arahanta. There are several instances where the teachers who taught the dhamma according to the Buddha's teachings and caused many people to attain arahantship when they themselves had not reached any stage of enlightenment. But the Buddha had, as has been quoted before in this list, taught all we need to know about the path 'holding nothing back'. Everything we need is in the Tipitaka, in the Dhamma which he left as teacher in his place, and as long as the dhamma is there, he is still with us. I have complete confidence in the Buddha and his teachings, Amara > > Dear Herman, > > Panna is not wisdom to know things as they really are for nothing. > The arahanta would know they have reached that stage, although that > stage without kilesa is also without mana that makes them distinguish > their nama and rupa from the rest of nama and rupa. After each level > of attainment there is a nana that goes revues all the kilesa > eradicated and all that is left, so none of the ariya puggala could > ever mistake the level they are at and what there is left to > eradicate. > > Amara > > > Do Arahants know they are Arahants? Do Arahants know the fetters > they > > are not bound by? Do Arahants know their death? Can an observer know > > an Arahant? > > > > I answer all the above in the negative. Which is why I think that > the > > concept Arahant is not very useful (because it is not verifiable) > > (umless you have superpowers, which are also not verifiable). > > > > > > > > Kind Regards > > > > Herman > > > > 5033 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Mon Apr 30, 2001 3:22pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: 'Vajrayana' Erik, I'm torn between that pool dip and a not to you...maybe just a quick one for now! Just to say I appreciated all your trouble in sharing this background....you can really play a very important role here....and I rather enjoy any of the debates with you! I have a dear friend who is always talking to me about 'Pure Land' and now I understand a little better where this comes from. I have practised yoga and pranayama for a very long time and also studied Chinese healing systems etc. However I have no idea at all of any of these having anything to do with Buddhism or what the Buddha taught. For similar reasons, I have misgivings about whether tantra and the other practices you mention can really be considered 'Buddhist' in this sense and how they help develop any understanding or kusala at this moment. I'm getting distracted and I know this is not an adequate response, but it'll probably have to wait til I'm home for more! Perhaps others will debate better! Sarah --- Erik wrote: > --- Jonothan Abbott > wrote: > > Erik > > > > > I was lucky in this regard: Zen short-circuited > that > > > temptation for > > > me, because I came to Vajrayana after having > been > > > well-established in > > > the core of the Dharma. Anyway, you can't be > > > "vajrayanic." It is > > > either what you are (physiologically) or it is > not. > > > You can't choose > > > it; it chooses you. > > > > I've not come across the term 'vajrayana' before. > > Would you mind giving a short explanation? > Thanks. > > Vajrayana literally means 'diamond vehicle,' the > appellation applied > to the form of Buddhism that arose in India and was > well-represented > (fairly dominant even I beleive) from the 8th > century on in various > monasteries like Nalanada (the Mahasiddha Naropa is > the root lineage- > holder of the Tibetan Kagyu and Geluk and Sakya > schools, and Naropa > was abbot of Nalanda). These teachings in particular > include that > various tantras. It seems all these practices arose > in a real > hothouse environment of the time in India. I am not > even close to > being a historian though, so please take this with a > grain of salt, > as it's to the best of my recollection. > > The etymology: Vajra is Sanskrit for 'diamond' as I > assume many here > are aware. Vajra also has many many deeper meanings > in Tibetan, where > it is known as Do-rJe (dorje), which literally means > 'Lord of > Stones'. > > One thing this symbolizes is the "adamantine wisdom" > of ongoing > realization. The Vajra is also symbolizes the > thunderbolt, which > represents the flash of insight that arises with > realization of > anicca, dukkha, and anatta. The dorje is also the > implement of Indra > (as well as the Tibetan version of Indra, > Vajrapani). Another meaning > I devised for this from my own painful experience is > fact that > there's only one known way to make a diamond, and > that's enormous > heat and pressure applied for a VERY long time. This > is very true in > tantra. When Kundalini (prana/chi) is activated > either through > natural ripening or forced with tantric energy > yogas, it's like being > tossed into a purificatory alchemical fire where > akusala kamma is > consumed, and black deeds are transformed by panna > into the purest > and most indestructible substance known to man. > > Since you asked, perhaps it would be helpful to > explain a bit about > tantric theory, since it a source of great confusion > for many people. > I have debated a LOT internally about the > justification and need for > tantra given the Buddha did not explicitly teach it > in the suttas. > And, the fact is, there is not a hair of difference > between the > understanding of the Four Noble Truths and anicca, > dukkha, and anatta > in the Tibetan Buddhadharma between what is taught > in the Theravada. > The agreement on this between systems--and I can say > this having > received correct teachings from teachers in both > lineages--is 100%, > even though presentations of the same thing differ > markedly, the > Tibetan relying largely on Nagarjuna's "Root > Treatise on the Middle > Way" (Mulamadhyamakakarika) for its presentation of > anatta, in this > case described as emptiness. > > I came to the conclusion that tantra is essential > for some people, > simply because of physiological makeup. If the > Kundalini starts > functioning you HAVE to deal with it. There is > simply no choice, > beacuse it can precipitate all sorts of really nasty > side-effects if > one is not prepared for it. So it's not even a > matter of preference > for many people, but a real necessity. Failing to > properly harness > and control activated Kundalini can lead to serious > psychological and > even physical problems, the worst recorded examples > being insanity > and death. (One reason tantra is called "walking the > razor's edge"). > > Tantric theory derives from the function of the > "prana" or life > energy that circulates in the body, the same thing > as taught in both > Traditional Chinese Medicine and Indian Ayurvedic > medicine, and > central to this physiological understanding are the > "chakras." Indian > tantrikas, both Buddhist and Hindu, discovered that > through certain > types of hatha yoga emphasizing breath control and > visualzation, one > can engender states of "inconceivable" bliss. Bliss > that has one very > interesting property: it somehow does NOT act as a > condition for > lobha. In other words, there is no clinging to this > type of bliss > generated in the practice of tantra. Another > interesting property of > this bliss is that it thoroughly pacifies the > nivaranas and acts as a > foundation for directly realizing emptiness (anatta) > when it arises > in meditation. > > The aim of tantric Buddhism is to harness this > capacity for bliss > built into this fathom-long body to open the door to > liberation. This > bliss is considered akin to nulclear fusion energy > as well, because > after a certain point it becomes self-sustaining in > terms of > engendering unstoppable bliss that supports acts of > virtue and > enables one to accumulate vast reserves of kusala > kamma, which is > taught to be necessary for attaining Buddhahood in > this lifetime. > When the Kundalini is fully activated this way, > there is the free > flow of prana throughout the body, but most > important through > the "heart chakra." Kundalini "bliss" effects are > all lokiya, and as > such are not confused with lokuttara realizations. > > This condition of fully awakened Kundalini is known > as a "tantric > paradise" or "pure land" and this is attained IN > THIS BODY. > This "tantric paradise" then serves as the > foundation for attaining > Buddhahood in the same lifetime. This tantric > paradise means that one > is inhabiting a state of perpetual > bliss-consciousness in this body. > This is supposed to be a very nice place to work out > one's final > liberation, because dukkha is strongly pacified > (though not > terminated, which is as always only via lokuttara > nana) by this > attainment. > > And just a note: Buddhahood is NOT "coming back > again and again" or > in direct contradiction to anything taught in the > Tripitaka about > final realization. It is still the blowing out of > the defilements, > though through a somewhat different strategy. The > final result is > still lokuttara, in other words--no god-realms, > atman, or any of that > some folks believe. I have been saddened by some of > the distortions > I've seen from people who should be much more > thorough in > investigating things they wish to criticize. I see > basic distortions > and misunderstanding on very basic points, for > example, attributing > Advaita Vedanta views like "non-duality" to it. One > particularly > serious misrepresentation of the Mahayana is this > one: > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/news/essay27.html > > This is like someone saying that the Abhidhamma is > anariyan Dhamma > because it asserts inherently existent realities. > That notion of > course IS wrong, but it isn't the Abhidhamma's > fault; it would be > based solely on a misunderstanding of paramattha > dhammas, someone > else's ideas I took at face-value without carefully > investigating > what the proponents of the Abhidhamma are actually > teaching. > > Anyway, I hope you find this of some use. It will > hopefully better > help you and I continue our conversations (and > debates!) as well. > 5034 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Mon Apr 30, 2001 5:50pm Subject: Re: Abhidhamma, Khun Sujin, and My Practice (mike) Dear mike, The tinge of sarcasm aside, your comments are a poignant summary of the flavor of some contemporary Abhidhamma writers. What a contrast to the Tipitaka! Although I'm only very briefly familiar with the modern writers, I think their differences with the original teachings lie mostly in the pedagogy and not the actual doctrine. The passive, discouraging, almost fatalistic tint of the new (enlightenment by lottery) is a striking contrast to the active, rousing, encouraging, uplifting style of the old. Which is more helpful at the present moment? Dan 5035 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Mon Apr 30, 2001 6:08pm Subject: The corruptions of insight At the early stages of meditation practice, it is very easy to confuse the fruits of concentration with the fruits of insight and to confuse minor insights with major insights. Although such confusion is bound to arise to some degree or another, some of the sting of the confusion may be reduced by reviewing the "corruptions of insight" from time to time. The Ten Corruptions of Insight (Ven. Mahasi's summary) When the meditator, in the exercise of noticing, is able to keep exclusively to the present body-and-mind process, without looking back to past processes or ahead to future ones, then, as a result of insight, (the mental vision of) a brilliant light will appear to him. To one it will appear like the light of a lamp, to others like a flash of lightning, or like the radiance of the moon or the sun, and so on. With one it may last for just one moment, with others it may last longer. There will also arise in him strong mindfulness pertaining to insight. As a result, all the successive arisings of bodily and mental processes will present themselves to the consciousness engaged in noticing, as if coming to it of themselves; and mindfulness too seems as if alighting on the processes of itself. Therefore the meditator then believes: "There is no body-and-mind prcess in which mindfulness fails to engage." His knowledge consisting in insight, here called "noticing," will be likewise keen, strong, and lucid. Consequently, he will discern clearly and in separate forms all the bodily and mental processes noticed, as if cutting to pieces a bamboo sprout with a well-sharpened knife. Therefore the meditator then believes: "There is no body-and-mind process that cannot be noticed." When examining the characteristics of impermanence, etc., or other aspects of reality, he understands everything quite clearly and at once, and he believes it to be the knowledge derived from direct experience. Further, strong faith pertaining to insight arises in him. Under its influence, the meditator's mind, when engaged in noticing or thinking, is serene and without any disturbance; and when he is engaged in recollecting the virtues of the Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Sangha, his mind quite easily gives itself over to them. There arise in him the wish to proclaim the Buddha's Teaching, joyous confidence in the virtues of those engaged in meditation, the desire to advise dear friends and relatives to practise meditation, grateful remembrance of the help received from his meditation master, his spiritual mentor, etc. These and many other similar mental processes will occur. There arises also rapture in its five grades, beginning with minor rapture. When purification of mind is gained, that rapture begins to appear by causing "goose-flesh," tremor in the limbs, etc.; and now it produces a sublime feeling of happiness and exhilaration, filling the whole body with an exceedingly sweet and subtle thrill. Under its influence, he feels as if the whole body had risen up and remained in the air without touching the ground, or as if it were seated on an air cushion, or as if it were floating up and down. There arises tranquillity of mind with the characteristic of quietening the disturbances of consciousness and its mental concomitants; and along with it appear mental agility, etc. When walking, standing, sitting, or reclining there is, under the influence of these mental qualities, no disturbance of consciousness and its mental concomitants, nor heaviness, rigidity, unwieldiness, sickness, or crookedness. Rather, his consciousness and its mental concomitants are tranquil through having reached the supreme relief in non-action. They are agile in always functioning swiftly; they are pliant in being able to attend to any object desired; they are wieldy, in being able to attend to an object for any length of time desired; they are quite lucid through their proficiency, that is, through the ease with which insight penetrates the object; they are also straight through being directed, inclined, and turned only towards wholesome activities. There also arises a very sublime feeling of happiness suffusing all his body. Under its influence he becomes exceedingly joyous and he believes: "Now I am happy all the time," or "Now, indeed, I have found happiness never felt before," and he wants to tell others of his extraordinary experience. With reference to that rapture and happiness, which are aided by the factors of tranquillity, etc., it was said: Superhuman is the bliss of a monk Who, with mind at peace, Having entered a secluded place, Wins insight into Dhamma. When he fully comprehends The five groups' rise and fall, He wins to rapture and to joy -- The Deathless this, for those who understand. Dhammapada vv. 373-374 There arises in him energy that is neither too lax nor too tense but is vigorous and acts evenly. For formerly his energy was sometimes lax, and so he was overpowered by sloth and torpor; hence he could not notice keenly and continuously the objects as they became evident, and his understanding, too, was not clear. And at other times his energy was too tense, and so he was overpowered by agitation, with the same result of being unable to notice keenly, etc. But now his energy is neither too lax nor too tense, but is vigorous and acts evenly; and so, overcoming these shortcomings of sloth, torpor, and agitation, he is able to notice the objects present keenly and continuously, and his understanding is quite clear, too. There also arises in him strong equanimity associated with insight, which is neutral towards all formations. Under its influence he regards with neutrality even his examination of the nature of these formations with respect to their being impermanent, etc.; and he is able to notice keenly and continuously the bodily and mental processes arising at the time. Then his activity of noticing is carried on without effort, and proceeds, as it were, of itself. Also in adverting to the objects, there arises in him strong equanimity, by virtue of which his mind enters, as it were, quickly into the objects of advertence. There arises further a subtle attachment of a calm nature that enjoys the insight graced with the "brilliant light" and the other qualities here described. The meditator, however, is not able to discern it as a corruption but believes it to be just the very bliss of meditation. So meditators speak in praise of it thus: "Only now do I find full delight in meditation!" Having felt such rapture and happiness accompanied by the "brilliant light" and enjoying the very act of perfect noticing, which is ably functioning with ease and rapidity, the meditator now believes: "Surely I must have attained to the supramundane path and fruition![33] Now I have finished the task of meditation." This is mistaking what is not the path for the path, and it is a corruption of insight which usually takes place in the manner just described. But even if the meditator does not take the "brilliant light" and the other corruptions as an indication of the path and fruition, still he feels delight in them. This is likewise a corruption of insight. Therefore, the knowledge consisting in noticing, even if quick in its functioning, is called "the early stage of (or 'weak') knowledge of arising and passing away," if it is beset and corrupted by those corruptions. For the same reason the meditator is at that time not in a position to discern quite distinctly the arising and passing away of bodily and mental processes. 5036 From: Herman Date: Mon Apr 30, 2001 7:09pm Subject: Re: Abhidhamma, Khun Sujin, and My Practice (mike) Dear Dan, If I may say, you have expressed in a very constructive and edifying manner some of the misgivings I have been dealing with for some time. Thank you. I have a srong Calvinistic background, and still feel an urgent sense of relief that I have somehow managed to escape from the bondage of the doctrines of predestination and double predestination. Briefly, the first doctrine holds that God has elected, from before time, only a small number of people to salvation, and that God purposefully intervenes in the lives of these elect to achieve this goal. Double predestination holds the same, with the added bonus that all those not elected to salvation, were actually elected by God to eternal damnation, and that God actively works in those lives to achieve that damnation. Don't laugh, this is a world view for millions of people around the globe. I find some of the teachings I encounter around these parts to be equally deterministic. In my view, determinism / fatalism renders the effort required to breathe futile. If I am not perfect now, I never will be. Kind Regards Herman --- "Dan Dalthorp" wrote: > Dear mike, > The tinge of sarcasm aside, your comments are a poignant summary of > the flavor of some contemporary Abhidhamma writers. What a contrast to > the Tipitaka! > > Although I'm only very briefly familiar with the modern writers, I > think their differences with the original teachings lie mostly in the > pedagogy and not the actual doctrine. The passive, discouraging, > almost fatalistic tint of the new (enlightenment by lottery) is a > striking contrast to the active, rousing, encouraging, uplifting style > of the old. Which is more helpful at the present moment? > > Dan 5037 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Mon Apr 30, 2001 7:38pm Subject: Re: Abhidhamma, Khun Sujin, and My Practice (mike) Hi Herman, I've read some Sproul, which I found fascinating. There really is some similarity between the protestant doctrine of predestination and anatta. The Christian path to salvation is to develop faith (i.e. let the ego subside enough to let God guide your life). Christianity is much more vague about just HOW to do it though, and the Calvinists in particular tend to say "faith is a gift of the H.S.--you either have it or you don't". The Buddhist path is expounded in detail in the Tipitaka, and the development of wisdom (which is akin to the Christian notion of "faith") CAN be undertaken. Dan 5038 From: Erik Date: Mon Apr 30, 2001 7:42pm Subject: Re: 'Vajrayana' --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > I have practised yoga and pranayama for a very long > time and also studied Chinese healing systems etc. > However I have no idea at all of any of these having > anything to do with Buddhism or what the Buddha > taught. For similar reasons, I have misgivings about > whether tantra and the other practices you mention can > really be considered 'Buddhist' in this sense and how > they help develop any understanding or kusala at this > moment. What is a satisfactory yardstick for developing kusala (and forget "at this moment"--that is a sukkhavipassaka strategy; jhanas and the union of samatha & vipassana are the primary practices in Tibetan Buddhism, recall), such that one can determine what is "Buddhist" from what is not? Where does one draw the line? Only what is found in the Tipitaka (this seems to be the prevalent view here)? This seems far too limiting to me. Every major Zen and Tibetan school teaches ariyan Dhamma, but no debate can settle this; only direct application and experience of the fruits can. The proof in the pudding is always in the tasting. To mix metaphors, there a saying: if the book on ducks says one thing about their behavior, but you observe the ducks acting differently in the wild, believe the ducks, not the books. Even according to the Buddha what is found in the Tipitaka only addresses a handful worth of the leaves found in the entire forest, so this is not suprising. There are two very general currents of thought I have observed regarding the Dhamma, trends that generalize even more broadly in society into orthodoxy and heterodoxy. The orthodox version says the Dhamma is a static entity; the heterodox version that accepts the Dhamma as a dynamic process transforming moment-to-moment, necessarily, because there are no static entites to be found anywhere. I am, and must be, of the heterodox category. I have seen too many different approaches work to pass judgment on any of them. I have seen the fruits both in my own life and in those of others. For me this is not a matter for doubt. Each approach has its advantages, each has its disadvantages. I have seen no indication of the relative superiority or inferiority of any of them. I have seen the relative helpfulness or unhelpfulness of traditions for those of specific accumulations, though. In general terms, those who actually practice and sincerely try to embody the teachings of a given school always seem to come out as friends to be associate with who are worthy of emulation. To me, anyway. 5039 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Apr 30, 2001 8:23pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Abhidhamma, Khun Sujin, and My Practice (mike) Dear dan, Is that R.C. Sproul , the american Christian writer? If so I found him a fine philosopher. His book Not a Chance : The Myth of Chance in Modern Science and Cosmology is excellent . robert --- Dan Dalthorp wrote: > Hi Herman, > I've read some Sproul, which I found fascinating. There really > is some > similarity between the protestant doctrine of predestination > and > anatta. The Christian path to salvation is to develop faith > (i.e. let > the ego subside enough to let God guide your life). > Christianity is > much more vague about just HOW to do it though, and the > Calvinists in > particular tend to say "faith is a gift of the H.S.--you > either have > it or you don't". The Buddhist path is expounded in detail in > the > Tipitaka, and the development of wisdom (which is akin to the > Christian notion of "faith") CAN be undertaken. > > Dan > 5040 From: Erik Date: Mon Apr 30, 2001 8:35pm Subject: Re: 'Vajrayana' --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Erik > > Thanks for your detailed explanation. It helps me to > understand where some of our members are coming from. > > My immediate reaction is, to return to an earlier > thread raised by you, that this is an area of definite > departure between the Mahayana and the Therevada > traditions. There are real departures. At the moment the biggest ones are how the fruits are categorized (ten vs. four in Tipitaka) AND the difference in ultimate aim and the definition of a "Buddha." These are the main areas I'm trying to understand, areas in which I have doubt (and will continue to have until such is resolved directly). I have found when texts disagree on a point, there is often a very rich vein to be mined by exploring that difference. I find exploring these differences very revealing of underlying theory as well. > The concept of 'black deeds [being] > transformed by panna into the purest and most > indestructible substance known to man' would seem to > contradict the teachings on kamma and vipaka. Would SEEM to, that is the key. Seem to. There is no "transformation" of akusala sankharas into kusala sankharas, if that's what you mean. It is a transmuation of all the base characteristics of the personality, via panna, into strenghts. Hatred is transmuted into compassion, for example, through the process or "reversals," a powerful way of dealing with akusala, given it effects transformation not only at the level of restraining bad behavior, but by helping one rewire one's categories to see the world in a different way due to an _epistemological_ reorganization of reality. For example, there is the practice of "pure vision" where one visualizes all beings as already perfected Buddhas. This plays into the teaching found in "Mind Training in Eight Verses" where "when someone whom I have helped and in whome I have placed great hope harms me with great injustice, may I see that one as a sacred friend, for they are rarely met." This takes a typical human problem--people treating us badly--and provides a new lens to view the "problem" through. In this case the tormenter is acting in the capacity of "sacred friend," providing opportunity to practice forbearance and restrain anger. In this way this being of "bad disposition" is actually a greater friend than any other, because this friend is providing the opportunity to overcome mental afflictions. Through their kindness we can terminate the causes to see this happen again through mindfulness at the moment we'd normally respond with anger. I have used this whenever the opportunity arises (and I'm mindful enough to recall it at that moment) because it works so well. Indeed it's the only thing that's kept me sane given some of the vipaka that's been ripening on me the past few years. Without this my presence as a Dhamma practitioner in the first place would be in question. It has literally saved my life. This also really shows in the behavior of those who practice it. It is the most powerful antidote to vyapada and patigha I have ever tried, and for someone with a very big accumulation of these two, I should know whereof I speak. Extrapolate this practice now, to everyone. To see everyone as a "sacred friend." How will that change how you interact with people if you suspect they are all holy beings here as your sacred friend, here to ripen you? That is, very generrally, the process of transformating "bad" into "good." > Likewise, the concept of a source or kind of kusala > outside those enumerated in the suttas would also be > contradictory. Contradictory to what, specifically? The only "contradiction" that matters is if it contradicts that which leads to abandoning akusala, cultivating kusala, and developing the mind with the panna that realizes the lokuttara nana the permanently abandons the samyojanas. Can you point to a case where the practices I outlined do NOT fall into these three categories, and why, specifically, they can't? > To particlarise, if tantric bliss is > kusala, what kind of kusala citta is it and what is > its object? I have no idea. My best guess at the moment is it _could_ be a jhanacitta with the factor of piti energized by viriya to an extraordinarily high degree. Someone raised this question with me in a private email and it's a very intersting idea, one I hadn't considered before. I think you raise a very interesting (and important) question, one I am now inclined to research: how do the Tibetans categorize the cittas arising in this process? I have not seen any documentation on this, but given the thoroughness of the Tibetan scholars I can't imagine no one else has addressed this in the past thousand years. I'll research this point and get back to you, because now I really want to know as well. > Yes, I'm sure it will. Funny thing about our debates > though, Erik. They usually die at an early stage, > with me waiting for an answer from you. The latest > example of this was my recent request for your > explanation of the term 'vipassana' as used in the > context of a statement you made. The definition for vipassana in Tibetan perfectly matches that in the Tipitaka. No point in further defining that on which we agree. That includes all the levels of vipassana-nana enumerated in the Abhidhamma. > I seem to recall > other examples (eg. the meaning of the Eightfold Path > as found in the Mahayana texts). Taught identically in Tibetan Buddhism. Jon, if in doubt always remember this: the Tibetans accept the Tipitaka as the word of the Buddha AS IS. 5041 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Mon Apr 30, 2001 9:27pm Subject: Re: Abhidhamma, Khun Sujin, and My Practice (mike) I believe it is the same R.C. Sproul, but I'm not familiar with "Not a chance..." I read "Willing to Believe", which is a historical survey of Christian doctrines about the power of free will to develop faith. > Dear dan, > Is that R.C. Sproul , the american Christian writer? If so I > found him a fine philosopher. His book > Not a Chance : The Myth of Chance in Modern Science and > Cosmology > is excellent . > > robert > > > > --- Dan Dalthorp wrote: > > Hi Herman, > > I've read some Sproul, which I found fascinating. There really > > is some > > similarity between the protestant doctrine of predestination > > and > > anatta. The Christian path to salvation is to develop faith > > (i.e. let > > the ego subside enough to let God guide your life). > > Christianity is > > much more vague about just HOW to do it though, and the > > Calvinists in > > particular tend to say "faith is a gift of the H.S.--you > > either have > > it or you don't". The Buddhist path is expounded in detail in > > the > > Tipitaka, and the development of wisdom (which is akin to the > > Christian notion of "faith") CAN be undertaken. > > > > Dan > > 5042 From: Howard Date: Mon Apr 30, 2001 8:13pm Subject: Questions: Viriya & Vi~n~nana [Re: chanda, lobha, viriya, (ditthi if time!)] Hi, Sarah (and all) - > Viriya energizes or 'cheers on' (o.k. I'll drop > cheerleader) the citta to cognize or be conscious of > its object and the other cetasikas to perform their > functions regardless of whether they are kusala or > akusala, and regardless, in conventional language, as > to whether they seem to be energetic or lazy ones...As > we have discussed, the nture of the viriya is > different at each moment, depending on the other > 'ingredients' it is combined with, but I don't see > that we can say it is stronger or weaker depending on > whether it is accompanied by sati or acompanied by > thina and middha (sloth & torpor) for example. > =============================== With regard to viriya, what do you understand to be the difference between it and jivitindriya (sp?), the latter of which I think of as an "enlivening" or "life-giving" or "energizing" faculty? (I'm trying to get a conceptual grasp of some of the cetasikas, and their differences.) One more point: There are certain universal factors which occur in any act of discernment/consciousness such as phassa (contact), viriya (energy), and sa~n~na (marking/recognizing). It almost seems that the co-occurrence of such universal factors, as a group, constitutes by itself, the citta/vi~n~nana. Most specifically, what I wonder about here is what can be the difference between phassa and vi~n~nana; there hardly seems a be a hair's difference betwen the two. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 5043 From: Erik Date: Tue May 1, 2001 0:42am Subject: Questions: Viriya & Vi~n~nana [Re: chanda, lobha, viriya, (ditthi if time!)] --- Howard wrote: > It almost seems that the co-occurrence of > such universal factors, as a group, constitutes by itself, the > citta/vi~n~nana. Most specifically, what I wonder about here is what can be > the difference between phassa and vi~n~nana; there hardly seems a be a hair's > difference betwen the two. I came across an interesting notion once long ago and more recently, one I've been trying to get more information on. It's called ekacittakkhanika-paticca-samupptada, meaning dependent origination within a single moment of citta. Just speculating on what the Abhidhamma says on this, but it seems that this is how one would distinguish between vinnana and phassa in a way that answers your question. 5044 From: Howard Date: Mon Apr 30, 2001 8:51pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: 'Vajrayana' Hi, Jon (and Erik, and all) - In a message dated 4/30/01 2:38:52 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes to Erik: > The concept of 'black deeds [being] > transformed by panna into the purest and most > indestructible substance known to man' would seem to > contradict the teachings on kamma and vipaka. > ================================== It seems to me that in the material of Erik's which I quote below, the intention is metaphorical, so that it is not that the black deeds themselves are literally transformed into wisdom and liberation, but that a powerful mix of right mindfulness, concentration, and effort serves to uproot defilements which are the kammic traces of akusala intentions and actions (the black deeds), leading to diamond-like wisdom and liberation. Incidentally, when Goenka describes the progress of vipassana meditation, he describes it as a process of uprooting layers and layers of reactive dispositions/inclinations (sankhara), of kammic traces, leading to the uprooting of the very deepest ones, followed by the attainment of insight and liberation - not so very different, I think, except for the use of metaphorical, poetic language vs more straightforward language, so that the "consuming" of akusala kamma by a purificatory alchemical fire becomes, in more pedestrian speech, the uprooting of kammic traces and the destruction of defilements in the oven of mindfulness (and other insight factors). What Erik wrote was: > ... tossed into a purificatory alchemical fire where > akusala kamma is > consumed, and black deeds are transformed by panna > into the purest > and most indestructible substance known to man. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 5045 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Tue May 1, 2001 0:54am Subject: Re: chanda, lobha, viriya, (ditthi if time!) Dan wrote: > > This brings up an interesting question, though, > > about why Narada would > > write his comment. He was a wise and learned > > bhikkhu, and I don't > > think he would make such a silly error unless > > there's more to it than > > meets the eye. B. Bodhi (Comprehensive Manual of > > A.S.) writes: "Viriya > > is the state or action of one who is vigorous...Its > > proximate cause is > > a sense of urgency or... anything that stirs one to > > vigorous action." > > Vigorous action arising out of a sense of urgency > > just doesn't seem to > > apply to just ANY ol' kusala or akusala citta, in particular > > those with thina > > and middha. Sarah: > For me, this is a little misleading, or perhaps that > depends on how one u'stands action. Flat out, unable > to move with dosa, say, and yet there is a sense of > urgency which stirs, not one, but the citta to be > fixed on the object at that moment too. Dan: I don't have any texts with me, but B. Bodhi's use of "urgency" and "vigorous" match closely the idea I have of "viriya" as presented in Vibhanga. Some actions and cittas are vigorous, some are not. In those that are more vigorous, viriya is more prominent. When viriya is subtle, as when thina and middha are strong, it seems to merge with jivitindriya, or maybe it's that your description of viriya is closer to my understanding of jivitindriya. How do you think about jivitindriya and how does it differ from viriya? 5046 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Tue May 1, 2001 0:57am Subject: Questions: Viriya & Vi~n~nana [Re: chanda, lobha, viriya, (ditthi if time!)] > I came across an interesting notion once long ago and more recently, > one I've been trying to get more information on. It's called > ekacittakkhanika-paticca-samupptada, meaning dependent origination > within a single moment of citta. Is it WITHIN a single citta or between cittas? Vibhanga has a nice (but dry and opaqu