5800 From: Sukinderpal Narula Date: Sun Jun 24, 2001 6:51pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup]Rebirth- Captain Akusala Dear Herman, Would it be easier for you to except rebirth if it was stated that given the number of sentient beings (and beings of other planes of existence) that are not human far out numbering those that are, the chances are that none of us in this list, having been born human in this life, would be born a human in any of the next many lives to come. What we would be born as is determined by our accumulated kamma. If I for example, were to die now, given that I(conventionally speaking), am forever driven by greed, hatred and delusion it would not surprise me that this citta would arise in the egg of a crow or cockroach. The clinging is no different. I hope I haven't got it all wrong, if so please state out the facts anyone. Metta, Sukin. Herman wrote: > Dear Mike, Robert and Kom, > > I hope you wil accept from me that I am a student of reality, not a > practising Buddhist. > > The Buddha is attributed with statements along the lines of :Take > nothing on blind faith, but test everything. > > There is lust no realisation here that after the death of this body, > some mental accumulations will settle in some other body. I guess if > it really is the case, and there is an open mind, the realisation wil > hit. But until then..... > > The threat of hell may be an incentive to accept a belief , in some > quarters, but not here. Quite the opposite in fact. > > There is infinite wisdom in the general teachings of the Buddha, but > if I am asked to bow before an infallible pope, casting all else > aside, I tend to think that I am dealing with a social institution > rather than a liberating insight, an institution hell bent on ideas > of self and self-perpetuation. > > Sorry if this offends. > > With lovingkindness > > Herman > > --- Robert wrote: > > --- > > Thanks Mike, > > Do you remember a sutta whch goes something like this: > > the Buddha was expounding in diverse ways the anattaness of all > > dhammas. At that time a bhikkhu thought "so there is no self, who > > then gets results of ill deeds, .." and reasoned that kamma etc > was > > not valid. the Buddha knew his mind and severely rebuked him saying > > that he "had taught in many suttas and gathas about kamma and > > results" and how this man was overreaching etc. > > robert > > > > > > "m. nease" <"m. nease"> wrote: > > > Dear Herman and Kom, > > > > > > --- Herman wrote: > > > > > > > I cannot see how this could be given we both agree > > > > there is not this "one". > > > > > > Hermann, I really appreciate your frankness regarding > > > your views. I was a little shocked at first but none > > > of us gets to decide what we do and don't believe--all > > > our beliefs arise and subside according to conditions, > > > as I understand it. > > > > > > That said, I must agree with Kom's points here, as > > > well as I'm able to understand them. I would go > > > further and say that, a view without kamma and rebirth > > > as a central feature may be some form of 'Buddhism' > > > but is definitely not Buddhadhamma. > > > > > > I think the mistake here is in thinking that rebirth > > > implies a self which is reborn. Mistaking what is > > > born and dies for self is absolutely central to > > > Buddhadhamma as I understand it. But throwing out > > > kamma and rebirth along with self-view is a really big > > > mistake, I think. > > > > > > Hermann, I don't take you for "an uninstructed, > > > run-of-the-mill person". I know you're extremely > > > well-informed and maybe I've completely misunderstood > > > your points. If so, my apologies--no offense > > > intended. > > > > > > "What is the cause, what is the origination, what is > > > the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that > > > fabrication? To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill > > > person, touched by the feeling born of contact with > > > ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication is born of > > > that. And that fabrication is inconstant, fabricated, > > > dependently co-arisen. That craving...That > > > feeling...That contact...That ignorance is inconstant, > > > fabricated, dependently co-arisen. It is by knowing & > > > seeing in this way that one without delay puts an end > > > to the effluents. > > > > > > "Or he doesn't assume form to be the self...but he may > > > have a view such as this: 'This self is the same as > > > the cosmos. This I will be after death, constant, > > > lasting, eternal, not subject to change.' This > > > eternalist view is a fabrication...Or...he may have a > > > view such as this: 'I would not be, neither would > > > there be what is mine. I will not be, neither will > > > there be what is mine.' This annihilationist view is a > > > fabrication...Or...he may be doubtful & uncertain, > > > having come to no conclusion with regard to the true > > > Dhamma. That doubt, uncertainty, & > > > coming-to-no-conclusion is a fabrication. > > > > > > "What is the cause, what is the origination, what is > > > the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that > > > fabrication? To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill > > > person, touched by what is felt born of contact with > > > ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication is born of > > > that. And that fabrication is inconstant, fabricated, > > > dependently co-arisen. That craving...That > > > feeling...That contact...That ignorance is inconstant, > > > fabricated, dependently co-arisen. It is by knowing & > > > seeing in this way that one without delay puts an end > > > to the effluents." > > > > > > Samyutta Nikaya XXII.81 > > > Palileyyaka Sutta > > > At Palileyyaka > > > > > > > > > http://www.cambodianbuddhist.org/english/website/canon/samyutta/sn22- > > 81.html > > > > > > Yo paticcasamuppadam passati, > > > so Dhammam passati. > > > Yo Dhammam passati, > > > so paticcasamuppadam passati. > > > > > > One who sees paticcasamuppada > > > sees the Dhamma. > > > One who sees the Dhamma > > > sees paticcasamuppada. > > > > > > [M.I.191] > > > > > > Best wishes, > > > > > > mike > > > 5801 From: Erik Date: Sun Jun 24, 2001 7:32pm Subject: Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! --- Dan wrote: > --- Joe wrote: > > Estoy en Todos Santos, Mexico, guey (hay dos en Mexico, uno en > > Guatemala)! > Dios mio! Esto no sabia. Muy interesante. Trabajaba unos ocho anos en > Guatemala, pero era en 1990. Es una pais muy interesante. > > > But I'd still like to hear what the Tipitaka has to say on the > > subject. I haven't found anything that quite applies, not that I > (or > > anyone I know) has read the entire Tipitaka. > > The five precepts are not to be taken lightly. In fact, they are > fundamental and essential. Without question hallucinogens > are "intoxicants." Only "intoxicants leading to heedlessness" Dan. That's because they first of all diminish attention, promote unwise attention, and suppress hiri and ottapa to the point you dumb things, like break the other precepts. That's why the precept against intoxicants exists. fit the fifth precept if you understand its intent. 5802 From: Herman Date: Sun Jun 24, 2001 7:48pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup]Rebirth- Captain Akusala Dear Sukin, I assume from your post, given that you feel that you are "forever driven by greed, hatred and delusion", that it is not a good thing to be a cockroach or a crow. And we both know it isn't all that crash- hot to be human either. There are difficulties all around. It is this wanting, this shoulding, that is difficult. I get what I don't want, and I want what I don't get. Some then go on to the conclusion that it is better not to be. And then someone comes along and says, if you do this, that , this that for a million years, then you will not be, and this is good. Sukin, the idea of rebirth is totally foreign to me. I wasn't brought up with it. It means absolutely nothing to me. I was brought up with the idea of a triune god. It is a totally stupid idiotic nonsensical idea , but it was fed to me as a child and I ate it. Now that I am grown up, I realise that it means nothing to me, but the idea of reincarnation/ rebirth means even less. Children are sponges, and in my wading pool the ideas were all about Christ, heaven , Satan. I think it was Loyola who said, Give me a child before it is seven and I will give you the man /woman. I always understood this to mean, in the first seven years of a persons life, you can shape definitively the views/ideas that this person will have for the rest of their life. I am grateful for the teachings of the Buddha. I hope that by ingesting the teachings of the Buddha the saying of Loyola can be proved incorrect. So far , there is nothing to report. I do not know..... With lovingkindness Herman --- Sukinderpal Narula wrote: > Dear Herman, > Would it be easier for you to except rebirth if it was stated that > given the number of sentient beings (and beings of other planes > of existence) that are not human far out numbering those that are, > the chances are that none of us in this list, having been born human > in this life, would be born a human in any of the next many lives to come. > What we would be born as is determined by our accumulated > kamma. If I for example, were to die now, given that I (conventionally > speaking), am forever driven by greed, hatred and delusion it would > not surprise me that this citta would arise in the egg of a crow or > cockroach. The clinging is no different. > I hope I haven't got it all wrong, if so please state out the facts anyone. > Metta, > > Sukin. > > Herman wrote: > > > Dear Mike, Robert and Kom, > > > > I hope you wil accept from me that I am a student of reality, not a > > practising Buddhist. > > > > The Buddha is attributed with statements along the lines of :Take > > nothing on blind faith, but test everything. > > > > There is lust no realisation here that after the death of this body, > > some mental accumulations will settle in some other body. I guess if > > it really is the case, and there is an open mind, the realisation wil > > hit. But until then..... > > > > The threat of hell may be an incentive to accept a belief , in some > > quarters, but not here. Quite the opposite in fact. > > > > There is infinite wisdom in the general teachings of the Buddha, but > > if I am asked to bow before an infallible pope, casting all else > > aside, I tend to think that I am dealing with a social institution > > rather than a liberating insight, an institution hell bent on ideas > > of self and self-perpetuation. > > > > Sorry if this offends. > > > > With lovingkindness > > > > Herman > > > > --- Robert wrote: > > > --- > > > Thanks Mike, > > > Do you remember a sutta whch goes something like this: > > > the Buddha was expounding in diverse ways the anattaness of all > > > dhammas. At that time a bhikkhu thought "so there is no self, who > > > then gets results of ill deeds, .." and reasoned that kamma etc > > was > > > not valid. the Buddha knew his mind and severely rebuked him saying > > > that he "had taught in many suttas and gathas about kamma and > > > results" and how this man was overreaching etc. > > > robert > > > > > > > > > "m. nease" <"m. nease"> wrote: > > > > Dear Herman and Kom, > > > > > > > > --- Herman wrote: > > > > > > > > > I cannot see how this could be given we both agree > > > > > there is not this "one". > > > > > > > > Hermann, I really appreciate your frankness regarding > > > > your views. I was a little shocked at first but none > > > > of us gets to decide what we do and don't believe--all > > > > our beliefs arise and subside according to conditions, > > > > as I understand it. > > > > > > > > That said, I must agree with Kom's points here, as > > > > well as I'm able to understand them. I would go > > > > further and say that, a view without kamma and rebirth > > > > as a central feature may be some form of 'Buddhism' > > > > but is definitely not Buddhadhamma. > > > > > > > > I think the mistake here is in thinking that rebirth > > > > implies a self which is reborn. Mistaking what is > > > > born and dies for self is absolutely central to > > > > Buddhadhamma as I understand it. But throwing out > > > > kamma and rebirth along with self-view is a really big > > > > mistake, I think. > > > > > > > > Hermann, I don't take you for "an uninstructed, > > > > run-of-the-mill person". I know you're extremely > > > > well-informed and maybe I've completely misunderstood > > > > your points. If so, my apologies--no offense > > > > intended. > > > > > > > > "What is the cause, what is the origination, what is > > > > the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that > > > > fabrication? To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill > > > > person, touched by the feeling born of contact with > > > > ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication is born of > > > > that. And that fabrication is inconstant, fabricated, > > > > dependently co-arisen. That craving...That > > > > feeling...That contact...That ignorance is inconstant, > > > > fabricated, dependently co-arisen. It is by knowing & > > > > seeing in this way that one without delay puts an end > > > > to the effluents. > > > > > > > > "Or he doesn't assume form to be the self...but he may > > > > have a view such as this: 'This self is the same as > > > > the cosmos. This I will be after death, constant, > > > > lasting, eternal, not subject to change.' This > > > > eternalist view is a fabrication...Or...he may have a > > > > view such as this: 'I would not be, neither would > > > > there be what is mine. I will not be, neither will > > > > there be what is mine.' This annihilationist view is a > > > > fabrication...Or...he may be doubtful & uncertain, > > > > having come to no conclusion with regard to the true > > > > Dhamma. That doubt, uncertainty, & > > > > coming-to-no-conclusion is a fabrication. > > > > > > > > "What is the cause, what is the origination, what is > > > > the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that > > > > fabrication? To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill > > > > person, touched by what is felt born of contact with > > > > ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication is born of > > > > that. And that fabrication is inconstant, fabricated, > > > > dependently co-arisen. That craving...That > > > > feeling...That contact...That ignorance is inconstant, > > > > fabricated, dependently co-arisen. It is by knowing & > > > > seeing in this way that one without delay puts an end > > > > to the effluents." > > > > > > > > Samyutta Nikaya XXII.81 > > > > Palileyyaka Sutta > > > > At Palileyyaka > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.cambodianbuddhist.org/english/website/canon/samyutta/sn22- > > > 81.html > > > > > > > > Yo paticcasamuppadam passati, > > > > so Dhammam passati. > > > > Yo Dhammam passati, > > > > so paticcasamuppadam passati. > > > > > > > > One who sees paticcasamuppada > > > > sees the Dhamma. > > > > One who sees the Dhamma > > > > sees paticcasamuppada. > > > > > > > > [M.I.191] > > > > > > > > Best wishes, > > > > > > > > mike > > > > 5803 From: Erik Date: Sun Jun 24, 2001 9:51pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup]Rebirth- Captain Akusala --- Herman wrote: > Dear Mike, Robert and Kom, > > I hope you wil accept from me that I am a student of reality, not a > practising Buddhist. > > The Buddha is attributed with statements along the lines of :Take > nothing on blind faith, but test everything. Indeed, Herman, indeed. Ehipassiko! Take nothing on faith. Investigate everything. This is the heart-advice of the Tathagatas. > There is infinite wisdom in the general teachings of the Buddha, but > if I am asked to bow before an infallible pope, casting all else > aside, I tend to think that I am dealing with a social institution > rather than a liberating insight, an institution hell bent on ideas > of self and self-perpetuation. > > Sorry if this offends. Social institutions are simply that: social institutions. The Dhamma, profound, subtle, to be experienced by the wise, belongs to no one, no institution, no person, no holy book, no concept. "there is no form, no feeling, no perception, no formation, no consciousness; no eye, no ear, no nose, no tongue, no body, no mind; no appearance, no sound, no smell, no taste, no touch, no dharmas, no eye dhatu up to no mind dhatu, no dharma dhatu, no mind consciousness dhatu; no ignorance, no end of ignorance up to no old age and death, no end of old age and death; no suffering, no origin of suffering, no cessation of suffering, no path, no wisdom, no attainment, and no non- attainment." OM GATE GATE PARAGATE PARASAMGATE BODHI SVAHA! (Prajnapramita Hridayam Sutra) 5804 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jun 24, 2001 10:02pm Subject: Fwd: Re: Welcome to dhammastudygroup Dear Friends, Here is a 'coming out' message from our latest new member. Tadao, great to have you with us. Welcome to Victor, too. Jon & Sarah Zermatt (on Z's only functioning internet computer - in a bar with Bob Marley coming over at mega decibels) --- ppp wrote > Dear Dhamma friends: > My name is Tadao Miyamoto. I am the newest member of > the DSG. > I teach linguistics at the University of Victoria, > BC, Canada. > (When I was much much younger,) I spent eight years > of my life > as a Buddhist monk in such countries as Indonedia, > Thailand, and Sri Lank. > Unfortunately, for the last two decades (i.e. after > emigrating > to Canada), I have very much neglected my > development of satipatthaana. > I am hoping that becoming a member of the DSG > is/constitute > my first step to resume my long journy to "cross the > flood". > Tadao Miyamoto, Ph.D. > Dept of Linguistics > University of Victoria > BC, Canada V8W 3P4 > P.S. > Besides Japanese and English, I understand Pali, > Thai, and > Sanskrit. > 5805 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jun 24, 2001 10:26pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: the meaning of dhamma op 20-06-2001 08:04 schreef Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2) op CL Loke: asking, >> 1. the meanings of the word dhamma >> 2. how it is divided into nama and rupa >> 3. how that is categorized into the 4 paramatthadhamma > Dear Loke, The word dhamma has many meanings. The teaching of the Buddha is called the Dhamma. Dhamma as one of the three Jewels is supramundane dhamma, lokuttara dhamma: nibbana and the eight supramundane cittas which experience nibbana at the moment of enlightenment. When we pay respect to the Dhamma we express our confidence that nibbana, the end of defilements, is the goal of the Buddha¹s teachings and that this can eventually be realized if we follow the right Path. Now I shall speak about the dhammas which are near to you, in yourself and around you: they are the realities or dhammas which appear through the eyes,the ears, the nose,the tongue,the bodysense and the mind-door. Dhammas are realities each with their own characteristic, they are not imaginary. When you are talking to someone else you may think of that person and of yourself. You can think of a person, but a person is a conventional reality, it is not real in the ultimate sense. The objects appearing one at a time through one of the senses or the mind-door are real in the ultimate sense, they are dhammas, or, paramattha dhammas, ultimate realities or absolute realities. The words ultimate and absolute do not denote abstract categories, they denote what is true, what has its own characteristic and can appear one at a time through one of the six doorways. There are dhammas which can experience an object, such as seeing or thinking, and dhammas which do not experience anything, physical phenomena such as colour or visible object, sound or hardness. The dhammas which experience something are nama dhammas and those which do not experience anything are rupa dhammas. Consciousness or citta is nama. Only one citta at a time arises and it experiences only one object. When you are talking it seems that you see, hear and think all at the same time, but there can be only one moment of consciousness, one citta at a time. Seeing experiences colour through the eyesense, which is another rupa dhamma. Hearing experiences sound through the earsense. Seeing and hearing arise at different sense bases, because of different conditions and they experience different objects, how could they arise at the same time. But since cittas arise and fall away extremely rapidly, succeeding one another, it seems that they can last and that there can be more than one experience at a time. In the ultimate sense, life exists only in one moment, be it seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, an experience through the bodysense or through the mind-door. The Buddha taught satipatthana so that direct understanding of nama and rupa can be developed. Than we can verify the truth ourselves. We can prove that our life is nama and rupa arising because of their appropriate conditions and devoid of self. There are four kinds of paramattha dhammas: citta, cetasika (mental factor arising with the citta such as feeling, attachment, understanding) and rupa, and these are the three conditioned dhammas, dhammas arising because of their appropriate conditions. Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma. It is unconditioned but it can be the condition for the citta which experiences it by way of object condition. Each citta experiences an object and the object is one of the conditions for the citta. The supramundane citta, lokuttara citta experiences nibbana, which is the condition for that citta by being its object. Nibbana is the end of all defilements. The magga-citta, path-consciousness, experiences nibbana and eradicates defilements. When we learn about different classifications we should not forget that they concern our life right now, that they are not abstract catgories. We may learn about processes of cittas, but these processes are real, they occur now. Seeing arises in a sense-door process, and there is not only one citta experiencing visible object in that process, there are also cittas with like or dislike which may follow very closely. When we consider how quickly like or dislike can follow we can begin to see that we cannot direct which citta arises at a particular moment. They have their own conditions, they are non-self. When we are talking to someone else, sound may appear, or a slight aversion when we exert ourselves finding the right words, or conceit, when we find that we talk in a clever way, or softness or hardness, when moving the lips or gesticulating. There are many kinds of realities, dhammas, and gradually we can learn more about them. With metta, Nina. 5806 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jun 24, 2001 10:26pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] listening and connsidering op 22-06-2001 14:56 schreef bruce op : >>> The prerequisites for the arising of awareness are: >> - having met the dhamma, listened to it and considered it at length >> - having understood correctly what awareness is, its function and >> characteristic and what can be the object of awareness >> - applying what one has heard and correctly understood. > > i just don't get this, as usual....how does one "apply" what one has heard? > what is being done? how does one "consider" what one has heard? these > sound so active and choice-driven ....is this "applying" and "considering" > something that one can choose to do? do you do it, jon? does anyone on the > list do it? if so, please, i'd really like a description of and details > about how-to-do such an activity, as an "activity" is certainly what it > sounds like ....or am i unable to see the forest out of the molehills? > Dear Bruce, It all begins with listening to the Dhamma as it is explained by a person with right understanding. Listening also includes reading the scriptures. We can also listen to tapes of Khun Sujin explaining the Dhamma. This listening should not be a passive listening, it should be listening and deeply considering in one's own life what one learns from the teachings. For example, we read that the Buddha teaches "the all" as Robert quoted in a sutta. What is this all? The eye, seeing, the ear, hearing, all experiences through the six doors and all objects that can be experienced. Just reading this is not enough, we have to get to know in our life, it is our life. There should be clear understanding of all these objects, of nama and rupa. The fact that we are able to hear the Dhamma is conditioned by experiences in the past. Kusala kamma in the past conditions hearing today. Our accumulated inclinations in the past, the inclination to listening in the past, conditions the fact that we wish to listen today. Listening is a condition for considering what we hear, and thus gradually there can be conditions for direct awareness and understanding of one object at a time as it appears through eye, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense or mind-door. That in itself is the application of the Dhamma, that is practice in accordance with the Dhamma. You ask, how to do such an activity? It arises because of the appropriate conditions, no you who can do anything at all. All activities are devoid of self, no you or me. You ask, is anyone on the list doing this? I am listening and considering, but not enough. As Khun Sujin said, listening is never enough. We have accumulated such an amount of ignorance that we need aeons of listening, considering and awareness of nama and rupa. I like your straightforward questions. Nina. 5807 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jun 24, 2001 10:26pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup: Contact > --- jlsallis wrote: > Hi, group - >> well, although I said I would lurk for a while, I do have a question. Have >> also started to read "Cetasikas". I have been mulling over phassa for a >> while, and even after reading that section, am still stuck. I can see >> phassa as two possibilities - (1) as a description of the process of contact >> between the sense base, the object, and the sense consciousness - i.e. the >> "union" of the three of these is contact. Or (2) As an enabler - something >> called "contact" enables the union of the sense base, object, and sense >> consciousness. Neither of these seems satisfactory, but as I said, even >> after reading the "phassa" chapter, I still can't figure this out. >> Any ideas? >> thanks >> Judy > Dear Judy, Contact as you have read, accompanies each citta, it is a mental reality. It assists the citta in contacting the object at that moment, so that citta can experience it. When, for example, hearing hears sound, you know that there is contact performing its function. Hearing hears sound through the earsense, a rupa which is physical base and doorway. Thus, when there is the coinciding of earsense, sound and hearing, in other words, when hearing hears sound through the earsense, you know that there is contact, and this is the manifestation of contact. You write: . There are several conditions for the arising of sense consciousness experiencing an object through a sense-door. Contact is one condition among many other conditions, and all these conditions are most intricate. Also volition performs its function of coordinating the tasks of the other accompanying cetasikas, and there are other cetasikas, each performing their own function, so that citta can cognize the object. Kamma produces the physical base, and also seeing or hearing are results of kamma. Not only the sense cognitions are results of kamma, also the accompanying cetasikas such as contact is result of kamma when it accompanies vipakacitta, citta which is result of kamma. I do not know whether this explanation is sufficient to you? If you want to ask more, you are welcome. Nina. 5808 From: Erik Date: Sun Jun 24, 2001 10:37pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup: Contact --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: Dearest Nina, I've been meaning to do this for some time now, but I just wanted to thank you profusely for taking the time to write and share "Abhidhamma in Daily Life." It changed my life. I purchased it a few years ago, out of interest in learning the nitty- gritty of Abhidhamma, and the descriptions there of the rupajhanas completely unlocked the meaning of meditation for me, which was something I'd been quite unclear on before. It was not until just recently I re-read it and was able to begin to learn many of the subtler concepts there, and again, it has been an invaluable reference, my primary reference besides the Visuddhimagga, to date. Many many thanks and the deepest and sincerest gratitude for your excellent work, Nina. Erik 5809 From: Tom Anderson Date: Sun Jun 24, 2001 10:51pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup]Rebirth- Captain Akusala Herman, hello from Toronto -- I think I can sympathise with your difficulty of understanding here. When I was in University (in the 60's) I had an "experience" -- I had no way to understand it, but it was very real. [no kind of drugs were involved] I began to read all sorts of things that I would never perviously have even wondered about. Among them was W. James' Varieties of Religions Experience and the Zen Teachings of Huang Po. Understanding, however, just couldn't understand -- yet I had had an experience that was real but understanding could not understand it either. It was not until the mid-80's that I actually sat down in a zendo and began to practise. Very gradually something different from understanding began to dawn. I don't exactly have a way with words, so I can only characterize this new experience as a kind of "knowing" that doesn't require the utilitarian kind of understanding that applies to travel directions or making dinner, or building a computer. You don't have to be a "practising Buddhist" to take on this challenge of "knowing". Having a good Buddhist teacher would, however, be helpful. -- The Buddha also tried everything. He was a prince and his father wanted him to follow in the family political tradition. Every known pleasure was known. Probably even understood. But it did not lead to the cessation of suffering (that persistent sense of dissatisfaction that permeates all experience). I think you are probably in good company! --- Herman wrote: > Dear Mike, Robert and Kom, > > I hope you wil accept from me that I am a student of reality, not a > practising Buddhist. > > The Buddha is attributed with statements along the lines of :Take > nothing on blind faith, but test everything. > > There is lust no realisation here that after the death of this body, > some mental accumulations will settle in some other body. I guess if > it really is the case, and there is an open mind, the realisation wil > hit. But until then..... > > The threat of hell may be an incentive to accept a belief , in some > quarters, but not here. Quite the opposite in fact. > > There is infinite wisdom in the general teachings of the Buddha, but > if I am asked to bow before an infallible pope, casting all else > aside, I tend to think that I am dealing with a social institution > rather than a liberating insight, an institution hell bent on ideas > of self and self-perpetuation. > > Sorry if this offends. > > With lovingkindness > > > Herman > > > --- Robert wrote: > > --- > > Thanks Mike, > > Do you remember a sutta whch goes something like this: > > the Buddha was expounding in diverse ways the anattaness of all > > dhammas. At that time a bhikkhu thought "so there is no self, who > > then gets results of ill deeds, .." and reasoned that kamma etc > was > > not valid. the Buddha knew his mind and severely rebuked him saying > > that he "had taught in many suttas and gathas about kamma and > > results" and how this man was overreaching etc. > > robert > > > > > > "m. nease" <"m. nease"> wrote: > > > Dear Herman and Kom, > > > > > > --- Herman wrote: > > > > > > > I cannot see how this could be given we both agree > > > > there is not this "one". > > > > > > Hermann, I really appreciate your frankness regarding > > > your views. I was a little shocked at first but none > > > of us gets to decide what we do and don't believe--all > > > our beliefs arise and subside according to conditions, > > > as I understand it. > > > > > > That said, I must agree with Kom's points here, as > > > well as I'm able to understand them. I would go > > > further and say that, a view without kamma and rebirth > > > as a central feature may be some form of 'Buddhism' > > > but is definitely not Buddhadhamma. > > > > > > I think the mistake here is in thinking that rebirth > > > implies a self which is reborn. Mistaking what is > > > born and dies for self is absolutely central to > > > Buddhadhamma as I understand it. But throwing out > > > kamma and rebirth along with self-view is a really big > > > mistake, I think. > > > > > > Hermann, I don't take you for "an uninstructed, > > > run-of-the-mill person". I know you're extremely > > > well-informed and maybe I've completely misunderstood > > > your points. If so, my apologies--no offense > > > intended. > > > > > > "What is the cause, what is the origination, what is > > > the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that > > > fabrication? To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill > > > person, touched by the feeling born of contact with > > > ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication is born of > > > that. And that fabrication is inconstant, fabricated, > > > dependently co-arisen. That craving...That > > > feeling...That contact...That ignorance is inconstant, > > > fabricated, dependently co-arisen. It is by knowing & > > > seeing in this way that one without delay puts an end > > > to the effluents. > > > > > > "Or he doesn't assume form to be the self...but he may > > > have a view such as this: 'This self is the same as > > > the cosmos. This I will be after death, constant, > > > lasting, eternal, not subject to change.' This > > > eternalist view is a fabrication...Or...he may have a > > > view such as this: 'I would not be, neither would > > > there be what is mine. I will not be, neither will > > > there be what is mine.' This annihilationist view is a > > > fabrication...Or...he may be doubtful & uncertain, > > > having come to no conclusion with regard to the true > > > Dhamma. That doubt, uncertainty, & > > > coming-to-no-conclusion is a fabrication. > > > > > > "What is the cause, what is the origination, what is > > > the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that > > > fabrication? To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill > > > person, touched by what is felt born of contact with > > > ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication is born of > > > that. And that fabrication is inconstant, fabricated, > > > dependently co-arisen. That craving...That > > > feeling...That contact...That ignorance is inconstant, > > > fabricated, dependently co-arisen. It is by knowing & > > > seeing in this way that one without delay puts an end > > > to the effluents." > > > > > > Samyutta Nikaya XXII.81 > > > Palileyyaka Sutta > > > At Palileyyaka > > > > > > > > > http://www.cambodianbuddhist.org/english/website/canon/samyutta/sn22- > > 81.html > > > > > > Yo paticcasamuppadam passati, > > > so Dhammam passati. > > > Yo Dhammam passati, > > > so paticcasamuppadam passati. > > > > > > One who sees paticcasamuppada > > > sees the Dhamma. > > > One who sees the Dhamma > > > sees paticcasamuppada. > > > > > > [M.I.191] > > > > > > Best wishes, > > > > > > mike > > > 5810 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jun 25, 2001 0:17am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup]Rebirth- Captain Akusala Dear Herman, I find your persistent resistance to religious blind faith most admirable. --- Herman wrote: > I hope you wil accept from me that I am a student of > reality, not a > practising Buddhist. I do accept that, and appreciate the difference. I seldom call my self 'a Buddhist' either, because that means so many things to so many different people and it can lead to a lot of misunderstanding. To me the Buddhdhamma contains the most convincing explanation of reality, so I accept it as a working hypothesis--but not without confidence resulting from continual personal investigation. In this sense a practising Buddhist is, in my considered opinion, the foremost student of reality. > The Buddha is attributed with statements along the > lines of :Take > nothing on blind faith, but test everything. Right, and not just test everything--I think you might be referring the Kalama Sutta?: "Of course you are uncertain, Kalamas. Of course you are in doubt. When there are reasons for doubt, uncertainty is born. So in this case, Kalamas, don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, 'This contemplative is our teacher.' When you know for yourselves that, 'These qualities are unskillful; these qualities are blameworthy; these qualities are criticized by the wise; these qualities, when undertaken & carried out, lead to harm & to suffering' -- then you should abandon them. "Now, Kalamas, don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, 'This contemplative is our teacher.' When you know for yourselves that, 'These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when undertaken & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness' -- then you should enter & remain in them." Anguttara Nikaya III.65 Kalama Sutta To the Kalamas http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an03-065.html > There is lust no realisation here that after the > death of this body, > some mental accumulations will settle in some other > body. This is only one aspect of kamma and rebirth. I have no personal knowledge of this either, and don't accept it as a matter of blind faith. What I do know as a matter of personal experience is that ignorance, aversion and desire (to speak very generally) DO die and ARE reborn constantly, that 'self' is an ever-changing concept arising from these impermanent phenomena (somewhat in the way that a moving image arises out of the scanning electron beam on the surface of a television screen), and that the actions (kamma) of the present moment will have an effect on the arisings of those various phenomena which will arise in the future. All of these things I've investigated over and over again and have never found any reason to doubt them. As I understand it, the Buddha said that all of the Dhamma is like this: Sandi.t.thiko akaaliko ehipassiko: to be seen here & now, timeless, encouraging everyone to come and see Opanayiko paccatta"m veditabbo viññuuhi: leading onward, to be seen by the wise for themselves Since I can't remember whether or not 'I've' had any past lives outside 'this body' (both just concepts andyway), I don't feel at all compelled to form an opinion on the subject. When the time comes maybe I'll be able to know this from experience. Until then I intend to focus on what I am able to experience and understand. > I guess if > it really is the case, and there is an open mind, > the realisation wil > hit. But until then..... Just the way I see it. > The threat of hell may be an incentive to accept a > belief , in some > quarters, but not here. Quite the opposite in fact. > > There is infinite wisdom in the general teachings of > the Buddha, but > if I am asked to bow before an infallible pope, > casting all else > aside, I tend to think that I am dealing with a > social institution > rather than a liberating insight, an institution > hell bent on ideas > of self and self-perpetuation. I would never ask you to bow before anyone, though personally I quite enjoy bowing to venerable monks, for example. But that's another subject. The social institution of 'Buddhism' is of little interest to me (except for the Bhikku-sangha). But if there's anything on earth which ISN'T hell-bent on ideas of self and self-perpetuation, it's the Buddhadhamma. > Sorry if this offends. Not at all! As I've said before, I really do find your candor and your reslolute resistance to dogma to be entirely admirable. Best Wishes, Herman, mike 5811 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jun 25, 2001 3:01am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup]Rebirth- Captain Akusala Dear Herman, Hope you'll excuse my butting in again. "This is how he attends inappropriately: 'Was I in the past? Was I not in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having been what, what was I in the past? Shall I be in the future? Shall I not be in the future? What shall I be in the future? How shall I be in the future? Having been what, what shall I be in the future?' Or else he is inwardly perplexed about the immediate present: 'Am I? Am I not? What am I? How am I? Where has this being come from? Where is it bound?" Majjhima Nikaya 2 Sabbasava Sutta All the Fermentations http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn002.html --- Herman wrote: > Some then go on to the conclusion that it is better > not to be. And > then someone comes along and says, if you do this, > that , this that > for a million years, then you will not be, and this > is good. This is not Dhamma--in fact it's a paraphrase of a wrong view (sakkaya-ditthi, self-view) and conditioned by vibhava tanha, thirst for non-existence. The Buddha didn't teach that right effort is for the sake of annihilation of self, but "...for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen... for the sake of the abandoning of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen... for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen... (and) for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen: This is called right effort." Digha Nikaya 22 Maha-Satipatthana Sutta The Great Frames of Reference http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn22.html Hope you'll find some of this pertinent (or maybe I'm completely off-base--if so, no offense intended). Best wishes, mike > Sukin, the idea of rebirth is totally foreign to me. > I wasn't brought > up with it. It means absolutely nothing to me. > > I was brought up with the idea of a triune god. It > is a totally > stupid idiotic nonsensical idea , but it was fed to > me as a child and > I ate it. Now that I am grown up, I realise that it > means nothing to > me, but the idea of reincarnation/ rebirth means > even less. Children > are sponges, and in my wading pool the ideas were > all about Christ, > heaven , Satan. > > I think it was Loyola who said, Give me a child > before it is seven > and I will give you the man /woman. I always > understood this to mean, > in the first seven years of a persons life, you can > shape > definitively the views/ideas that this person will > have for the rest > of their life. I am grateful for the teachings of > the Buddha. I hope > that by ingesting the teachings of the Buddha the > saying of Loyola > can be proved incorrect. So far , there is nothing > to report. I do > not know..... > > With lovingkindness > > > Herman 5812 From: Dan Date: Mon Jun 25, 2001 7:11am Subject: Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view,...drugs [Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo] Dear Ven. Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo, Thanks for the wonderful links on the function of hallucinogens in spiritual practice! The writings have some very important lessons. 1. In his article on the spiritual effects of the hallucinogen DMT, Rick Strassman relates the experiences of one of his patients(?): *****.Her eyes closed, she begins spurting out laughter, at times quite uproarious, and her face turns red. "Well, I met a living buddha! Oh, God! I'm staying here. I don't want to lose this. I want to keep my eyes closed to allow it to imprint itself. Just because it's possible!" Elena felt great the next week. "Life if very different. A buddha is now always in the upper right-hand corner of my consciousness," says Elena. "All of what I have been working on spiritually for the last several years has become a certainty. Left hooks from the mundane world continue to come up and hit me, but the solidity of the experience anchors me, allows me to handle it all. Time stopped at the peak of the experience; now everyday time has slowed. The third stage, that of coming down from the peak was the most important; if I had opened my eyes too soon I wouldn't have been able to do as much integrating of the experience as I have." ...Many of the changes in her life, particularly a deepening shift from "thinking" to "feeling," were "supported" by the DMT session, but were underway before it, and continued after it. ...My own interest in Buddhism and psychedelics meet in the most positive way in her DMT-induced "enlightenment-experience." ...Elena's case is a good example of an enlightenment experience-- sounding identical to reports in the Buddhist meditative tradition-- brought on by a high dose of DMT. ***** Comment: Elena apparently had a very strong attachment to some unusual drug-induced visions. Those visions and her attachment to them were interpreted as "enlighenment experience." This is one of the big dangers of hallucinogens that I mentioned---the intensity of the perception is so striking that it is difficult not to confuse perception with understanding and to attach special meaning ("enlightenment") to those perceptions. 2. In his well-written article "Are psychedelics useful in the practice of Buddhism?", Myron Stolaroff writes: ".One often feels that he or she has dropped a heavy load off the body, and his or her spirits are high. A heavier mind can come from the unresolved situation described above; otherwise, there is lightness of feeling and clarity of mind. Other than toll, there is renewal. I have friends who take many different kinds of vitamins and nutriments to achieve healthy states of mind and body and to have more energy. I try their various recommendations, but my experience is that none of them work as well as a good, appropriate psychedelic session. Rather than being brought further down, you are climbing the mountain with considerable help." Comment: At their best, Myron Stolaroff argues that the psychedelics are useful to re-energizing the mind, in sort of the same way as vitamins or nutriments but more intensely. This may well be true, but this is not path, even at the mundane level. It seems that the undisciplined nature of the chemically induced results makes it very difficult to discern path from non-path because the intensity of the perception is artificially out of balance with the development of understanding. 3. In his interview with Tricycle, Terrence McKenna made the following statements about mixing Buddhism with psychedelics. ...Tricycle: The tools being psychedelics substances? McKenna: Yes. It would be very interesting to find Buddhists who were open-minded enough to go back and start from scrath with psychedelics and not do the ordinary "we've got a better way" rap, but to say, "Maybe we do, maybe we don't. Let's go through these things with all our practice and all our understanding and all our technique and put it with botany, chemistry, and all this ethnography." And then what could you come up with? Comment: Now, who was this Terrence McKenna? In his own words, his interest in Buddhism was peripheral: "Tricycle: You have emerged as the leading spokesperson for the use of psychedelics. What is the history of your encounter with Buddhism McKenna: Like so many people in the sixties, I came up through D. T. Suzuki's books on Zen. And then early on, because of my art historical bent, I became interested in Tibetan Buddhism. But my interest was not exactly Buddhism. It was more the shamanic pre- Buddhist phenomenon of the Bon religion--which grew out of the shamanic culture of pre-Buddhist Tibet." He's primarily interested in psychedelic shamanism, so it is no wonder that he advocates re-working the Dhamma and improving on it. Dhamma is so precious, deep, and subtle that I can't imagine that such a re-working could improve on the Buddha's dispensation. Let's try to understand and preserve the Dhamma rather than make radical changes by transforming it into a hallucinogen way. Dan 5813 From: DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Mon Jun 25, 2001 8:21am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view,...drugs [Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo] Hi Dan, Hi Everyone! Namaste! You are welcome. What interests me as a scientist is the brain and nervous system as well as they hadaya-vatthu! The perspective I take on this is somewhat eclectic but very cautious. Medicine is one thing, "recreational" drug use is another and something not just serious but very dangerous. From an Einsteinian perspective, what we observe is affected by us and out own energies, though the old time paradigms cast this view completely aside. I do not think that the Newtonian-Cartesian paradigm with it reductionism, mechanistic anthropocentric approaches works. I also assert that Aristotelian logic is unable to effectively deal with areas of philosophical approach, argumentation, and problem solving. There is no doubt in my mind now, that the Dhamma has great similarities to quantum mechanics, Einstein's Unified Field Theory, and the "new" physics. As a matter of fact, the Blessed One once explained the nature of the universe and went into incredible scientific detail for a large group of people that were interested. He gave teaching for 2 plus weeks but these have not been adequately translated into English. On the above, I know only of one text in English, and as a matter of fact, I am trying to locate a copy of it: Ranasinghe, C.P., THE BUDDHA'S EXPLANATION OF THE UNIVERSE This is an excellent text to supplement Abhidhamma studies! I would be interested in more dialogue on this thread, too. Oddly enough, I was doing some research and came across an old post that was published on the Net! I wrote it when I was a samanera in Taiwan! %-) LOL!!! Here it is: (see what you good and kind folks think...) >If you are really interested, you can research the discourses He gave to >more than 10,000 people who gathered, headed by Mathu (Maathu), a prominent >person at the time the Buddha was alive, to answer these questions, when >Mathu requested the Buddha to explain fully life and the universe. The >people who were there to listen to this teaching actually listened to a huge >number of lectures on this subject, after the Buddha was greatly moved by >their sincerity. > >The lectures and demonstrations lasted daily, and for three months! > >Ven. Sariputta (Saariputa) recorded the proceedings of this whole event. > >I can refer those interested in this astrology subject, and science, as >explained by the Buddha to the following texts, but I cannot guarantee they >are on the Net. It will take some research on your own...good for practice, >too! ;-) > >Seven important texts are usually studied and researched first but >admittedly they are very deep and complicated: (collectively they are known >as the "Satta Pakarana", and belong to the Abhidhamma teachings of Lord >Buddha): > >1. Dhammasangani Pakarana >2. Vibhanga Pakaran >3. Dhatukatha Pakarana >4. Puggala Pan/n/ Pakarana >5. Kathavatthu Pakarana >6. Yamaka Pakarana >7. Pat.thana Pakarana > >More simple texts for beginning students would be: > >1. Abhidhammattha Sangaha >2. Abhidhammavatara >3. Nama Rupa Pariccheda >4. Paramattha Vinicchaya >5. Nama Rupa Samasa > >and these can be started first, and then one can move to the seven listed >above. > >And as the Buddha taught, do not accept these things on mere faith or >because they strike your fancy, but rather study these things with the >intention of fully and clearly understanding them. > >And please note that the Abhidhamma is NOT a mere study of the supernatural >as many modern scholars will assert. The Abhidhamma is a study in natural >phenomena just as they are! Neither is it mere theory, nor is it abstract >and/or subtle talk. Abhidhamma is a systematic study of the whole universe. >It deals with mind (nama (naama)) and matter (rupa (ruupa). Abhidhamma has >been rightly called the Science of the Universe. > >If the Buddha, could, at His time, say that some forces of energy were and >are 17 times slower than the speed of the repetition of the mind, i.e., >176,470,000,000 per the duration of a flash of lightning, what does that >tell you? Given that the speed of light is approximately 186,000 >miles/second or 3.0 X 10 to the eighth meters/sec. We could say that the >Buddha was a "fast thinker", eh? ;-) > >So, if you are interested in astrology, and really understanding it in >extremely great detail, there is nothing in Buddhism that forbids the study >of it, or the universe in general. > >This is the Dawning of the Age of Aquarius? This is the New age? Ha! > >There is really nothing new under the sun! A Tibetan monk might teach this >is the Dark Age of this Yuga cycle (and I would agree!), and it is hardly a >"dawning", but, in fact, more a declining! If this is the so-called "New >Age", tell me then what is new about dukkha (suffering)? > >Metta cittena, > >Dharmadasa > > > > Nice to read you and everyone, as always, here! I appreciate the wonderful hard work and effort that so many sisters and brothers take here on behalf of the Sasana! The time, expense of energy, and of course, the heartfelt sincerity is very uplifting and inspiring. May this find everyone well. With Maha Metta, Dhammapiyo Bhante ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2001 7:11 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view,...drugs [Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo] > Dear Ven. Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo, > Thanks for the wonderful links on the function of hallucinogens in > spiritual practice! The writings have some very important lessons. > > 1. In his article on the spiritual effects of the hallucinogen DMT, > Rick Strassman relates the experiences of one of his patients(?): > *****.Her eyes closed, she begins spurting out laughter, at times > quite uproarious, and her face turns red. "Well, I met a living > buddha! Oh, God! I'm staying here. I don't want to lose this. I want > to keep my eyes closed to allow it to imprint itself. Just because > it's possible!" > > Elena felt great the next week. "Life if very different. A buddha is > now always in the upper right-hand corner of my consciousness," says > Elena. "All of what I have been working on spiritually for the last > several years has become a certainty. Left hooks from the mundane > world continue to come up and hit me, but the solidity of the > experience anchors me, allows me to handle it all. Time stopped at > the peak of the experience; now everyday time has slowed. The third > stage, that of coming down from the peak was the most important; if I > had opened my eyes too soon I wouldn't have been able to do as much > integrating of the experience as I have." > > ...Many of the changes in her life, particularly a deepening shift > from "thinking" to "feeling," were "supported" by the DMT session, > but were underway before it, and continued after it. > > ...My own interest in Buddhism and psychedelics meet in the most > positive way in her DMT-induced "enlightenment-experience." > > ...Elena's case is a good example of an enlightenment experience-- > sounding identical to reports in the Buddhist meditative tradition-- > brought on by a high dose of DMT. ***** > > Comment: Elena apparently had a very strong attachment to some > unusual drug-induced visions. Those visions and her attachment to > them were interpreted as "enlighenment experience." This is one of > the big dangers of hallucinogens that I mentioned---the intensity of > the perception is so striking that it is difficult not to confuse > perception with understanding and to attach special meaning > ("enlightenment") to those perceptions. > > 2. In his well-written article "Are psychedelics useful in the > practice of Buddhism?", Myron Stolaroff writes: ".One often feels > that he or she has dropped a heavy load off the body, and his or her > spirits are high. A heavier mind can come from the unresolved > situation described above; otherwise, there is lightness of feeling > and clarity of mind. Other than toll, there is renewal. I have > friends who take many different kinds of vitamins and nutriments to > achieve healthy states of mind and body and to have more energy. I > try their various recommendations, but my experience is that none of > them work as well as a good, appropriate psychedelic session. Rather > than being brought further down, you are climbing the mountain with > considerable help." > > Comment: At their best, Myron Stolaroff argues that the psychedelics > are useful to re-energizing the mind, in sort of the same way as > vitamins or nutriments but more intensely. This may well be true, but > this is not path, even at the mundane level. It seems that the > undisciplined nature of the chemically induced results makes it very > difficult to discern path from non-path because the intensity of the > perception is artificially out of balance with the development of > understanding. > > 3. In his interview with Tricycle, Terrence McKenna made the following > statements about mixing Buddhism with psychedelics. > ...Tricycle: The tools being psychedelics substances? > McKenna: Yes. It would be very interesting to find Buddhists who were > open-minded enough to go back and start from scrath with psychedelics > and not do the ordinary "we've got a better way" rap, but to > say, "Maybe we do, maybe we don't. Let's go through these things with > all our practice and all our understanding and all our technique and > put it with botany, chemistry, and all this ethnography." And then > what could you come up with? > > Comment: Now, who was this Terrence McKenna? In his own words, his > interest in Buddhism was peripheral: > > "Tricycle: You have emerged as the leading spokesperson for the use > of psychedelics. What is the history of your encounter with Buddhism > McKenna: Like so many people in the sixties, I came up through D. T. > Suzuki's books on Zen. And then early on, because of my art > historical bent, I became interested in Tibetan Buddhism. But my > interest was not exactly Buddhism. It was more the shamanic pre- > Buddhist phenomenon of the Bon religion--which grew out of the > shamanic culture of pre-Buddhist Tibet." > > He's primarily interested in psychedelic shamanism, so it is no > wonder that he advocates re-working the Dhamma and improving on it. > Dhamma is so precious, deep, and subtle that I can't imagine that > such a re-working could improve on the Buddha's dispensation. Let's > try to understand and preserve the Dhamma rather than make radical > changes by transforming it into a hallucinogen way. > > Dan > 5814 From: jlsallis Date: Mon Jun 25, 2001 9:47am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup: Contact Dear Nina, thank you for your answer. I have only copied the relevant parts of your post, which do make it sound like contact enables the citta to contact the object, even though it is only one condition. I hope this is correct! thanks again Judy >Contact as you have read, accompanies each citta, it is a mental reality. It >assists the citta in contacting the object at that moment, so that citta can >experience it. When, for example, hearing hears sound, you know that there >is contact performing its function. >You write: and sense consciousness>. There are several conditions for the arising of >sense consciousness experiencing an object through a sense-door. Contact is >one condition among many other conditions, 5815 From: jlsallis Date: Mon Jun 25, 2001 9:53am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Joining Realities into a "Whole" (From 'Cetasikas') Hi, Nina: I have been reviewing some earlier posts that touch on areas that I am trying to get a grip on. On June 19, in the post "joining realities into a whole," Howard wrote: . We are inclined to join different realities together into a 'whole", > I am trying to understand *where* the attempted joining of different > realities occurs. If cittas truly occur as separate, discrete states, then it > would seem that such a "joining" would have to occur within a single citta, > in which case it is a processing of *memories* of preceding cittas and their > cetasikas. Is this so? Nina wrote: . Then there are after seeing has fallen away other types of cittas which recognize the meaning of the letters and other ones which think of the story that was written, and the thinking goes on and on. It seems that everything is known in one moment, seeing and recognizing the letters and knowing the meaning, but this is not so. We join as it were many different phenomena into a whole: the world, we, ourselves who are unhappy or happy. Indeed, sa~n~naa, remmebrance, which accompanies each citta plays an important part, but also other cetasikas. I have read and reread your response, and do understand it, but I am still not sure where "conception" takes place. Is this something that would happen in the sixth consciousness? thank you Judy 5816 From: Dan Date: Mon Jun 25, 2001 8:59am Subject: Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view,...drugs [Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo] Ven. B.D. > From an Einsteinian perspective, what we observe is affected by us and out > own energies, though the old time paradigms cast this view completely aside. Einstein was a scientist. He studied (indirectly) material phenomena not produced by the mind. I'm mildly curious how you arrived at your formulation of this "Einsteinian perspective"--it doesn't sound anything like the Einstein I know! > I do not think that the Newtonian-Cartesian paradigm with it reductionism, > mechanistic anthropocentric approaches works. It works extraordinarily well at describing certain material phenomena. Of course, this is of little use when it comes to ultimate liberation from suffering, but Newton never pretended that his physics addressed that issue at all. In any case, it is a delight to hear from you! Dan 5817 From: DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Mon Jun 25, 2001 10:24am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view,...drugs [Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo] Reply in context below: ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2001 8:59 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view,...drugs [Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo] > Ven. B.D. > > From an Einsteinian perspective, what we observe is affected by us > and out > > own energies, though the old time paradigms cast this view > completely aside. > > Einstein was a scientist. Yes, he was. He also was a philosopher --- and I mean a "lover of wisdom". This "Einsteinian perspective" was well described by Albert Einstein himself. > He studied (indirectly) material phenomena > not produced by the mind. He also studied the nature of mind and mental phenomena as well. > I'm mildly curious how you arrived at your > formulation of this "Einsteinian perspective"--it doesn't sound > anything like the Einstein I know! > This "Einsteinian perspective" was well described by Albert Einstein himself. > > I do not think that the Newtonian-Cartesian paradigm with it > reductionism, > > mechanistic anthropocentric approaches works. > > It works extraordinarily well at describing certain material > phenomena. I beg to differ. It does not in my experience, and I am a scientist. > Of course, this is of little use when it comes to ultimate > liberation from suffering, but Newton never pretended that his > physics addressed that issue at all. > I never mentioned Newton specifically and outside of Newton, in fact, the new paradigms are holistic and are addressing this issue a great deal --- and studying the Dhamma right beside nuclear physics! > In any case, it is a delight to hear from you! > You, too! Please feel free to write me off-list, too! Keep in touch. May this find you and the community here well! > Dan Metta, Dhammapiyo Bhante > > 5818 From: Herman Date: Mon Jun 25, 2001 10:24am Subject: Realities and conditions for realities Hi all, If I set my alarm clock for 3pm, is this a five-fold mass creating conditions for hearing alarm bells to arise? Or are realities being created, with volition, intention to create them? If after hearing the alarm, I step into a cold bath, is this five- fold mass creating conditions for body-sense of coldness to arise, or are realities being created, with volition, intention to create them? If I paint the bathroom red, is this five fold mass creating conditions for seeing red to arise, or is the reality of seeing red being created with volition, intention to create them? Kind regards Herman 5819 From: Herman Date: Mon Jun 25, 2001 0:12pm Subject: Re: Quantum Physics --- "DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo" wrote: > Hi Dan, Hi Everyone! > > > From an Einsteinian perspective, what we observe is affected by us and out > own energies, though the old time paradigms cast this view completely aside. > I do not think that the Newtonian-Cartesian paradigm with it reductionism, > mechanistic anthropocentric approaches works. I also assert that > Aristotelian logic is unable to effectively deal with areas of philosophical > approach, argumentation, and problem solving. I agree with you, but I always thought it was more Planck, Schrodinger and Heisenberg, rather than Einstein. But back to what you were saying about the Einstenian perspective, this really means that awareness is not a passive activity, but it changes the dhamma that was its object. You could nearly say that awareness calls the dhamma into existence! Let me now if this is heretical :-) Kind regards Herman > > There is no doubt in my mind now, that the Dhamma has great similarities to > quantum mechanics, Einstein's Unified Field Theory, and the "new" physics. > As a matter of fact, the Blessed One once explained the nature of the > universe and went into incredible scientific detail for a large group of > people that were interested. He gave teaching for 2 plus weeks but these > have not been adequately translated into English. > > On the above, I know only of one text in English, and as a matter of fact, I > am trying to locate a copy of it: Ranasinghe, C.P., THE BUDDHA'S EXPLANATION > OF THE UNIVERSE > > This is an excellent text to supplement Abhidhamma studies! > > I would be interested in more dialogue on this thread, too. > 5820 From: Joe Date: Mon Jun 25, 2001 3:38pm Subject: Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! >Without question hallucinogens > are "intoxicants." A lot of folks out there would differ with that presumption. To understand what the Tipitaka context for 'intoxicants' really means could take us on a very long discussion revolving around Pali etymology. I wouldn't argue for the use of such substances, but I think both sides of this argument, in this forum, may be deviating from classic interpretations of Tipitaka. But I don't know that -- it's why I'm asking for Tipitaka expertise. Better yet Tipitka couple with Pali expertise. Otherwise, it's just idle speculation, no? 5821 From: Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2) Date: Mon Jun 25, 2001 4:11pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Fwd: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup thanks for the explanation... > -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Anderson > Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2001 4:37 AM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Fwd: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup > > Not unlike many guru-types, he could be all sweetness and delight in > public. In private, he could be demanding, critical of all effort > that produced less than perfect results and punishing of failure. > Punishing, here, means withholding his sweetness and delight, putting > the one who failed at a distance from which, very possibly, the one > who failed could not return. He knew the effect of witholding the > love we sought! I believe other organizations know it as shunning. > > But these things, despite their impact upon our psychological makeup, > have to be seen through, recognized as just what they are, past > experiences (even, perhaps, present ones). > > I have found it very difficult to extract myself from the grip and > scarring of that kind of spirituality as I became increasingly > interested in the Buddhadhamma. (I kept wanting to "figure out" what > went wrong. This caused me to have great difficulty in seeing the > simple truth laid out plainly before me!) > > That is not, I believe, the way. The Way is to see experience as > experience. Experience, in the solitude of sitting practise, the > remnants of what may linger from past damage and simply note its > arising, its changing and its departing. > > What could be more simple or more difficult? But the answer to the > conundrum is simply to persist. To persist in persisting. > > No thing, no experience, no pleasure, no pain has inherent substance. > There is only mind and the illusions it plays amongst that must be > seen. Perhaps I am confusing the film script (Little Buddha) with > something more profound: didn't the Buddha call this tendency > of "mind" simply *the architect* -- at the moment of recognizing the > architect of our suffering, we are free. > > If we learn anything from imperfect teachers, it is (?should be?) > what to avoid, yes? > > --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" > wrote: > > pleaseelaborate more about the ruthless in private thingy.... > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Tom A > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 6:42 PM > > > > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Fwd: RE: Welcome to > dhammastudygroup > > > > > > Mondy-making machine would be my first guess. Dooms-Day groups > tend > > > not to be profitable ;0) -- Increasingly, from what I can discern > > > from the internet, the organization is attracting fewer members > (no > > > doubt because it costs about 1,000 USD to learn the initial > > > technique -- it used to cost about 35 USD). TM bears many > > > resemblances to Buddhist ideas. But Mahesh claimed to have gotten > the > > > inspiration for TM whilst visiting the shrine of Lakshmi in > southern > > > India. [This was published in a book by Joyce Collins-Smith "Call > No > > > Man Master".] You can check out the activities of the > organization at > > > TranceNet. > > > > > > There are many guru-types of characters endeavouring to be as > > > successful as Mahesh (he is extremely charming in public and can > be > > > ruthless in private). It might not be such a bad idea to be aware > of > > > how they have borrowed/distorted the Buddhadhamma for their own > > > purposes. > > > > > > --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" > > > wrote: > > > > this sounds pretty scary... especially about the soverign > > > nation..... it has > > > > doomsday occult written all over it.......or money making > > > machine.... > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Tom A > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 6:38 PM > > > > > > > > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Fwd: RE: Welcome to > > > dhammastudygroup > > > > > > > > > > TM (transcendental meditation) is Maharishi Mahesh Yogi's way > of > > > > > bilking folks out of both trust and money. TM is a mantra > > > meditation. > > > > > One thinks the mantra as easily as any other thought: the > result > > > is, > > > > > like samatha, a sense of quietness, at which point, one comes > > > back to > > > > > the mantra at that quieter sense of thought. > > > > > > > > > > Trouble is, this leads to a very dissociated mental > condition, a > > > > > spacey feeling, a slight disorientation, a dreamy kind of > > > approach to > > > > > what others consider ordinary reality. (A safer form is Dr. > > > Benson's > > > > > Relaxation Response; but the dissociative tendency is still a > > > part of > > > > > the problem.) > > > > > > > > > > There are several sites that take a very critical look at TM. > I > > > can > > > > > post them if you are interested. Initially, TM feels good and > > > seems > > > > > to be quite helpful, but one is increasingly drawn (by these > > > > > feelings) into a desire for more involvement. [Hence, into > > > greater > > > > > dissociation from the concerns of life and concerns for > others.] > > > > > > > > > > Maharishi has turned this into a $3+billion enterprise! > > > Presently, he > > > > > is trying to establish his own soverign nation in a poor > South > > > > > American country. > > > > > > > > > > --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > what is this TM ... what is it like ? Samatha ? Vipassana ? > Or > > > > > others ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Loke CL > > > > > > 5822 From: Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2) Date: Mon Jun 25, 2001 4:29pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: the meaning of dhamma Thanks .. very much appreciate taking time to explain... though I may need to re-read the passage a few times to fulle digest it. Thanks... Loke CL > -----Original Message----- > From: Nina van Gorkom > Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2001 10:26 PM > Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: the meaning of dhamma > > op 20-06-2001 08:04 schreef Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2) op > CL Loke: asking, > > >> 1. the meanings of the word dhamma > >> 2. how it is divided into nama and rupa > >> 3. how that is categorized into the 4 paramatthadhamma > > > Dear Loke, > > The word dhamma has many meanings. The teaching of the Buddha is called > the > Dhamma. Dhamma as one of the three Jewels is supramundane dhamma, > lokuttara > dhamma: nibbana and the eight supramundane cittas which experience nibbana > at the moment of enlightenment. When we pay respect to the Dhamma we > express > our confidence that nibbana, the end of defilements, is the goal of the > Buddha¹s teachings and that this can eventually be realized if we follow > the > right Path. > Now I shall speak about the dhammas which are near to you, in yourself and > around you: they are the realities or dhammas which appear through the > eyes,the ears, the nose,the tongue,the bodysense and the mind-door. > Dhammas > are realities each with their own characteristic, they are not imaginary. > When you are talking to someone else you may think of that person and of > yourself. You can think of a person, but a person is a conventional > reality, > it is not real in the ultimate sense. The objects appearing one at a time > through one of the senses or the mind-door are real in the ultimate sense, > they are dhammas, or, paramattha dhammas, ultimate realities or absolute > realities. The words ultimate and absolute do not denote abstract > categories, they denote what is true, what has its own characteristic and > can appear one at a time through one of the six doorways. > There are dhammas which can experience an object, such as seeing or > thinking, and dhammas which do not experience anything, physical phenomena > such as colour or visible object, sound or hardness. The dhammas which > experience something are nama dhammas and those which do not experience > anything are rupa dhammas. Consciousness or citta is nama. Only one citta > at > a time arises and it experiences only one object. When you are talking it > seems that you see, hear and think all at the same time, but there can be > only one moment of consciousness, one citta at a time. Seeing experiences > colour through the eyesense, which is another rupa dhamma. Hearing > experiences sound through the earsense. Seeing and hearing arise at > different sense bases, because of different conditions and they experience > different objects, how could they arise at the same time. But since cittas > arise and fall away extremely rapidly, succeeding one another, it seems > that > they can last and that there can be more than one experience at a time. > In the ultimate sense, life exists only in one moment, be it seeing, > hearing, smelling, tasting, an experience through the bodysense or through > the mind-door. The Buddha taught satipatthana so that direct understanding > of nama and rupa can be developed. Than we can verify the truth ourselves. > We can prove that our life is nama and rupa arising because of their > appropriate conditions and devoid of self. > There are four kinds of paramattha dhammas: citta, cetasika (mental factor > arising with the citta such as feeling, attachment, understanding) and > rupa, > and these are the three conditioned dhammas, dhammas arising because of > their appropriate conditions. Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma. It is > unconditioned but it can be the condition for the citta which experiences > it > by way of object condition. Each citta experiences an object and the > object > is one of the conditions for the citta. The supramundane citta, lokuttara > citta experiences nibbana, which is the condition for that citta by being > its object. Nibbana is the end of all defilements. The magga-citta, > path-consciousness, experiences nibbana and eradicates defilements. > When we learn about different classifications we should not forget that > they > concern our life right now, that they are not abstract catgories. We may > learn about processes of cittas, but these processes are real, they occur > now. Seeing arises in a sense-door process, and there is not only one > citta > experiencing visible object in that process, there are also cittas with > like > or dislike which may follow very closely. When we consider how quickly > like > or dislike can follow we can begin to see that we cannot direct which > citta > arises at a particular moment. They have their own conditions, they are > non-self. When we are talking to someone else, sound may appear, or a > slight > aversion when we exert ourselves finding the right words, or conceit, when > we find that we talk in a clever way, or softness or hardness, when moving > the lips or gesticulating. There are many kinds of realities, dhammas, and > gradually we can learn more about them. > > With metta, Nina. > 5823 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jun 25, 2001 8:08pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Realities and conditions for realities Dear Herman, As I understand it, in each of the three examples, the five masses (or aggregates), pañcakakhandhas (material qualities, feeling, perception, co-efficients of consciousness and consciousness*) arise according to previously and currently arising conditions to condition, among other things, the three(+) results. Volition is one of the universal cetasikas which arise with every citta. It is one of many cetasikas included in the fourth aggregate (in your examples and elsewhere), sankharakhandha, which includes all cetasikas except saññaa (perception) and vedanaa (feeling). From Nina van Gorkom's 'Cetasikas': The Atthasalini (I, Part , Chapter I, 111) states about cetana that its characteristic is coordinating the associated dhammas (citta and the other cetasikas) on the object and that its function willing. We read: ... There is no such thing as volition in the four planes of existence without the characteristic of coordinating: all volition has it. But the function of 'willing' is only in moral (kusala) and immoral (akusala) states... It has directing as manifestation. It arises directing associated states, like the chief disciple, the chief carpenter. etc. who fulfil their own and others' duties." Herman, this is the sort of material of which I would be completely ignorant were it not for Khun Sujin, Robert, Nina, Sarah and Jon, a sort of 'lineage' of personalities who, conventionally speaking, conditioned the creation of this list and 'my' awareness of it. All these phenomena are so minute and brief that I (personally) can't have any subjective, conventional experience of them. So is it blind faith when I accept them as working hypotheses? I don't think so. If these teachings all concur with logic, personal experience and (my understanding of)the Suttanta then there is adequate cause to accept them as Buddhadhamma, at least until such a time as they fail to pass any of these tests. As for the study of reality, I know of none other with a more convincing claim to that label. If I find one I don't believe I'll have any choice but to adopt it, whether it's called Buddhadhamma or something else. This is, however, a very long shot, I think. mike (My apologies, as usual, if I've misunderstood anything or misrepresented any of this material). *Ven. Buddhadatta Mahaathera's Concise Pali-English Dictionary --- Herman wrote: > If I set my alarm clock for 3pm, is this a five-fold > mass creating > conditions for hearing alarm bells to arise? Or are > realities being > created, with volition, intention to create them? > > If after hearing the alarm, I step into a cold bath, > is this five- > fold mass creating conditions for body-sense of > coldness to arise, or > are realities being created, with volition, > intention to create them? > > If I paint the bathroom red, is this five fold mass > creating > conditions for seeing red to arise, or is the > reality of seeing red > being created with volition, intention to create > them? 5824 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jun 25, 2001 8:25pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Dear Joe, --- Joe wrote: > I wouldn't argue for the use of such > substances, but I > think both sides of this argument, in this forum, > may be deviating > from classic interpretations of Tipitaka. But I > don't know that -- > it's why I'm asking for Tipitaka expertise. Better > yet Tipitka couple > with Pali expertise. Otherwise, it's just idle > speculation, no? I don't know that concurrence with the Tipitaka is necessarily a condtion of right speech (as opposed to idle speculation). As I understand it, any discussion of bhaavanaa (increase; development by means of thought; meditation) is potentially kusala. That said, I think Robert's recent comments regarding hiri (shyness; sense of shame) and ottappa (shrinking back form doing wrong) are both pertinent and in concurrence with the Tipitaka (the Abhidhamma, in this case)--sorry I can't offer a citation. Best Wishes, mike 5825 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Mon Jun 25, 2001 10:33pm Subject: Great messages.. Dear All, Just catching up in between mountain hikes.... Great messages in our absence.. I wrote a longer message yesterday about our search for a computer here (the attitude is that they don't go with nature) and a couple of messages to Herman and Erik and then it all got lost when my coins ran out w'out warning...so won't try now.(Pretty hard to think with the loud music, chatter and 'beery' smells anyway. Anyway, many thanks everyone....a real treat to read.. Btw, we've known Tadao for a very long time, as a monk for many years, also studying with K.Sujin and as a good friend since. I still have some notebooks of his Pali translations from when he was a monk. Looking forward to your contributions, Tadao. best wishes, Sarah **p.s a few could do with a reminder to cut off irrelevant parts of old posts and yahoo blurb at the bottom..thanks, this helps the archives and those getting digest form or printing out. 5826 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jun 25, 2001 10:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hindrances and Satipatthana [Jon] Dan My apologies for not replying to yuor post sooner. Here is something I managed to get together just before leaving Hong Kong. --- Dan wrote: > Dear Jon, > Please be patient with me, Jon. I may not be the brightest bulb in > the drawer, but I do want to understand. You seem to disagree that > samatha can support and strengthen awareness, i.e. that it is > impossible for samatha to help sharpen awareness. I really must > apologize for my thick skull, ….. Dan, it is I who should be grateful for the patience that you have shown. I am articulating things that I have never had to put down in writing before, and am finding that this is a whole lot more demanding than doing so in a live conversation (Nina, I now marvel even more at your writings over the years). I think we are both doing fine here. By the way, it is not really a matter of intelligence (not that there’s any question of yours), but rather of views/preconceptions. By that I mean intelligence solves nothing when it comes to deeply held ideas. > ….. but I just don't see how what you wrote > supports the argument that it is impossible for samatha to help > sharpen awareness. This is not really the argument I have been making. Just to clarify the context as I understand it. Your focus is whether the practice of samatha can or should form part of the development of satipatthana, for someone who has seen the importance of satipatthana. You do not for example have in mind the connection between the development of awareness now and samatha and other kusala that have been developed previously (say prior to this lifetime) which is the connection that I think is the only one that can be made here. > > The prerequisites for the arising of awareness are: > > - having met the dhamma, listened to it and considered it at length > > - having understood correctly what awareness is, its function and > > characteristic and what can be the object of awareness > > - applying what one has heard and correctly understood. > > Or, "The voice of another and wise attention." According to > Visudhimagga, the proximate cause for understanding is concentration > (Vism. XIV). I would like to check that passage before commenting on it. > ….. Also, the hindrances obscure reality, making it > difficult to discern the lakhana in dhammas. Samatha entails > cultivation of concentration and temporarily dissipates the > hindrances, making it easier to discern lakhana, thereby sharpening > awareness, provided your "prerequisites" are also met. In this > fashion, samatha supports and strengthens awareness. I can't see how > this contradicts what you wrote. There MUST be a contradiction, > though, for your contention to stand. Dan, I think this is the same argument we have discussed before. It goes like this (I’ll try again and hope I get it right this time): - the hindrances ‘weaken wisdom/obscure reality’ - the practice of samatha can suppress the hindrances - so if samatha is practised, the hindrances can be suppressed, and this will make it easier for wisdom to see the characteristic of realities. I have previously made the comment that while the 2 assumptions here are correct, the 'stands to reason' conclusion is not one that is found in the texts. Let me try to give some of my thinking as to why this conclusion is not correct. 1. The sense in which the hindrances 'weaken insight'. We should keep in mind that the classification of unwholesomeness as the hindrances refers to kilesa that have arisen and are manifest as akusala citta. At such moments it can be said that reality is being obscured, in the sense that all akusala has moha (ignorance) as one of its roots. However, at moments other than moments of akusala citta, the hindrances are not present and they are not obscuring reality. This would be at moments when the citta is kusala, vipaka or kiriya. These moments include, for example, all moments of experience through the sense doors, such as the present moment of seeing and visible object. Thus the obstacle to knowing more about the characteristic of the present nama that is seeing or the rupa that is visible object is not any of the 5 hindrances, but is our accumulated ignorance, wrong view or general lack of developed awareness. Even more to the point, since the function of satipatthana is to study the reality of the present moment as it appears, there is no reason why even moments of akusala should not be studied with awareness arising immediately following the moment of akusala. Sati can be aware of the akusala of the preceding moment that has just fallen away (this is the same as for any moment of awareness – in terms of the moment-to-moment mental process, the awareness is not exactly contemporaneous with the object). So the idea that the hindrances make it unlikely or difficult for awreness to arise is itself an impediment to the arising of awareness. Consider the following passage from SN 46-38 'Without Hindrances' (Translation from 'Collected discourses of the Buddha, p. 1592) 'When, bhikkhus, a noble disciple listens to the dhamma with eager ears, attending to it as a matter of vital concern, directing his whole mind to it, on that occasion the five hindrances are not present in him; on that occasion the seven factors of enlightenment go to fulfilment by development.' [ends] 2. The significance of the fact that samatha can suppress the hindrances. The hindrances are only fully suppressed at the stage of access concentration. The level of hindrances in the rest of us will depend on not only on the development of samatha in this lifetime (if any), but also on the accumulated kilesa which we were born into this life with, as well as of course on any development of vipassana in this life. I believe that the accumulated understanding and kilesa that we were born with is a far greater factor than any practice of samatha so far in this life. (As a matter of interest, and I am only speculating here, but the kusala developed in this lifetime must surely be but a speck compared to the kusala developed during previous lives and accumulated in the cittas arising in this life.). But perhaps more importantly, it is not *suppression* of the hindrances that is significant in the context of satipatthana - it is really only their *non-arising*. As I have attempted to explain above, the 2 are not the same. First, because there are many moments in our lives when no akusala arises, and secondly because even if akusala does arise it can be object of awareness arising in a succeeding moment. > > As regards samatha, if we see the importance and urgency of > studying the > > reality of the present moment, it is not necessary to think in > terms of a > > specific role for samatha in that studying, any more than it is to > think > > in terms of a role for dana or sila. > > This is beside the point. There is marked difference between "not > necessary to think in terms of a specific role for samatha" > and "impossible for samatha to sharpen awareness." Dan, I believe it is very relevant. If we have the idea of a direct and immediate connection between the 2, and we ‘practice’ samatha with a view to having stronger satipatthana, I fear the result could be more akusala than kusala. > > There is a connection, but it is a question as to exactly what that > > connection is. > > That's right. There is a connection, and that connection is more > than "no connection." What do you say the connection is? > > Dan Dan, I hope my comments above have answered this but, if not, I would be happy to elaborate further. Jon 5827 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jun 25, 2001 11:00pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hindrances and Satipatthana (was Re: Discouraging (1.1) [Jon]) Bruce Thanks for your good questions. I would just like to add a short commetn to Nina's earlier post. --- bruce wrote: > hi jon, hi all > > i, of course, have the thickest skull of anyone on this list (mana!), > re: > > > Satipatthana is the development of awareness/mindfulness of a reality > > appearing at the present moment. > > > > The prerequisites for the arising of awareness are: > > - having met the dhamma, listened to it and considered it at length > > - having understood correctly what awareness is, its function and > > characteristic and what can be the object of awareness > > - applying what one has heard and correctly understood. > > i just don't get this, as usual....how does one "apply" what one has > heard? > what is being done? how does one "consider" what one has heard? these > sound so active and choice-driven ....is this "applying" and > "considering" > something that one can choose to do? do you do it, jon? does anyone on > the > list do it? if so, please, i'd really like a description of and details > about how-to-do such an activity, as an "activity" is certainly what it > sounds like ....or am i unable to see the forest out of the molehills? As people are often quick to point out, mere theoretical knowledge cannot lead to the development of the path. What has been heard/read needs to be related to one's experience of the present moment. There is no 'how-to-do' because there is no activity to be done. At first this can be discouraging, because we don't know what to do. But if we come to appreciate that this is the path as taught, then the idea that we should be doing something ceases to be a problem. It requires a certain degree of confidence, because there is no immediately measurable progress by conventional reckoning. Hope this helps clarify. Jon 5828 From: Dan Date: Mon Jun 25, 2001 11:59pm Subject: Holiday Hi all, After a flurry of activity over the past few weeks, I am going to have to go on holiday from dsg for a few months. Jon, I think you are right about samatha and satipatthana, and I think I am right too. Our language is different, and we both still need to practice some on expressing exactly what we mean. I thank you very much for helping shed light on this and so many other things. Erik, the debate about hallucinogens has been very valuable for me, and I hope it has conditioned some reflection on your part too. It's always a pleasure to lock horns with you! Sarah, although it seems like we are 180 degrees apart on the issue of "no practice", I think we are actually quite close, but again, we need to keep prodding each other to sharpen our language and the context of our comments. Robert, thanks for all your well-balanced, patient, and insightful help over the past several months. You have been wonderful every step of the way. Most recently, our mini-discussion of "faith vs. works" (to use the Christian language) was of immense help to me. Mike, it's great to have you back. Thanks for your encouragement. Howard, Num, Kom, Herman, Loke, Bhante D.(the Ven. explanation point!), Joe, and whoever else I'm missing, I haven't interacted much with you, but it's been fun reading your posts. Lurkers, your reading in the future will be much easier without me! I hope to be back around Christmas, but I may pop in every once in while for a comment or two. Best regards, all! Dan 5829 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Tue Jun 26, 2001 0:09am Subject: Respectful Appreciative Gesture Re: Paying Respect Dear Loke ChaiLiang How are you? I am a Buddhist yogi of many, many years. I have internalised the mental cultivation practice taught by the Buddha to such an extent that my body and mind do not feel good if I missed a practice session. The day with a practice session and the day without one have become sharply different. While a practice session is in progress, I experience the benefits of the practice, and enjoy satisfaction. Together with these good feelings, I always remember the Buddha and pay respect to him by raising my two hands in front of my chest with the two palms touching together. During a practice session, I could not kneel and touch my forehead on the back of my hands. So my respectful appreciative gesture is to raise my hands in front of my chest. Hope this message would help you figure out the reasons why we pay respect to the Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha, and our parents. With regards Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" wrote: > Dear list, > > Something struck me this morning while I was on my motorcycle on my > way to work..... Although I had been a practising Buddhist for almost 13 > years.... something came across that I couldn't seem to understand fully.... > the question is > > > "Why do we kneel and bring our foreheads down to the back of our > hands to pay respects to monks and our teachers....?" > > > Since it was done without knowing in the beginning .... or understanding and > now the need to understand arises.. ok ok I was asked by a friend and I > couldn't seems to be able to provide a satisfactory answer. Certain friends > told me this is to cultivate humility... but is that all ? What other > reasons for this actions ? I initially thought it to be some kind of > tradition and practise.... But I am sure there is more to it... > > Any takers ? > > May all of you be well and happy always, > > Loke CL 5830 From: Erik Date: Tue Jun 26, 2001 0:19am Subject: Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view,...drugs [Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo] --- Dan wrote: > Comment: At their best, Myron Stolaroff argues that the psychedelics > are useful to re-energizing the mind, in sort of the same way as > vitamins or nutriments but more intensely. This may well be true, but > this is not path, even at the mundane level. It seems that the > undisciplined nature of the chemically induced results makes it very > difficult to discern path from non-path because the intensity of the > perception is artificially out of balance with the development of > understanding. You seem to be confusing what is and is not the path yourself here Dan. It is absolutely essential to the path to take care of the body and mind, and if Mr. Stolaroff found benefit in this approach, more power to him. What is more conducive to awakening: a healthy body and mind? Or an unhealthy body and mind? For example, the Sabbasava Sutta notes: "What are the fermentations abandoned by using? ... reflecting appropriately, he uses medicinal requisites that are used for curing the sick simply to counteract any pains of illness that have arisen and for maximum freedom from disease." If you're feeeling mentally blocked or too tight, there are appropriate times when this sort of approach can work wonders, help clear out adventitious garbage, which is what I take from Mr. Stolaroff's account, which I have experienced in my own life. Do piti and viriya have any chance of arising in those in pain? Without piti and viriya, is there any hope of awakening? Surely anything that helps condition the arising of these factors can only be a good thing. And in this case, that can only happen if the use of entheogens is accompanied by Right View, which mitigates the potential dangers you indicate (and no one has ever suggested these are risk-free tools, quite the contrary, they are very risky for the ill-informed, because they can lead to precisely the problems you mention). But when Right View and appropriate intention are present, where specifically is the danger? Right View should be able to handle even the most intense mental phenomenena with equanimity without attachment or aversion. And how better to learn such equanimity than being tossed intense, difficult situations? > 3. In his interview with Tricycle, Terrence McKenna made the following > statements about mixing Buddhism with psychedelics. > ...Tricycle: The tools being psychedelics substances? > McKenna: Yes. It would be very interesting to find Buddhists who were > open-minded enough to go back and start from scrath with psychedelics > and not do the ordinary "we've got a better way" rap, but to > say, "Maybe we do, maybe we don't. Let's go through these things with > all our practice and all our understanding and all our technique and > put it with botany, chemistry, and all this ethnography." And then > what could you come up with? > He's primarily interested in psychedelic shamanism, so it is no > wonder that he advocates re-working the Dhamma and improving on it. Terence is simply presenting a very non-dogmatic and entirely sensible argument here, which is simply advocating a systematic exploration how these tools may fit in somehow with the Dhamma. If someone isn't doing this, then someone should be, because there are too many who've come into the path this way. Terence's shamanistic don't mean anything. The argument is right-on. We SHOULD be testing, exploring, investigating, each of us. Each of us has to make the Dhamma his or her own, not taken from books, but tested out. The Dhamma is ehipassiko, sandittiko, and akaliko. > Dhamma is so precious, deep, and subtle that I can't imagine that > such a re-working could improve on the Buddha's dispensation. Let's > try to understand and preserve the Dhamma rather than make radical > changes by transforming it into a hallucinogen way. The Dhamma is indeed so precious, deep, and subtle, and because of that it admits to all manners of skills-in-means approaches. No one's advocating making radical changes to the Dhamma, which would be insanity! Certainly not this colelction of heaps. How can you change the essence, thr Four Noble Truths, the tilakkhana, the paths & fruits? No one is dare suggesting any such thing. The only suggestion being made is that one can use take advantage of "external" conditions like seclusion, kutis, and even chemicals, as aids in creating the appropriate conditions for insight. The Dhamma is indeed "so precious, deep, and subtle," and is an open enough path that allows for all manners of skills-in-means--even those that may appear to offend some peoples' preconceptions. Upaya is, after all, one of the key tenets of the Mahayana (and tantric) system in which I practice. I am not encouraging others pursue Dhamma the way I've chosen to; I feel that would be irresponsible at this point, since there is still much to be learned. But I think we owe it to humanity to fully test these things out in the context of the Dhamma, because like it or not, many people, even well-known teachers (Jack Kornfield for example) came in via that gateway, as did I. And this is simply not going to go away, no matter how much anyone wishes it to. My feeling is accurate, definitive knowledge is best, rather than ignorance or conjecture. And the only way to discover that understanding is through direct experimentation and dispassionate analysis, combined with a willingness to take risks. If it is discovered there isn't a generalized potential, or only a limited one, that should be known as well. But I feel strongly it should be investigated as carefully as possible, to be known and understood, one way or another. Does this sound reasonable to you? 5831 From: Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala Date: Tue Jun 26, 2001 0:14am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Digest Number 429 Dear Jonathan, My computer was not functioning for several weeks, but now am finally back on line and trying to catch up with almost a month worth of digests. Please forgive the extremely late reply in answer to your question concerning Tipitika references for panna, its arising and subsequently, a deeper understanding of the self concept and its gradual reduction. Unfortunately, I am not familiar enough with the scriptures to know where to find references to this question. My comments below come exclusively from Achaan's teaching (which is that of Lord Buddha and thus from the Tipitika) and from my own experience. However, you have whetted my appetite (viriya, but maybe some lobha) to look and try to find the references in the scriptures in support, and in the process I may be able to learn a little more, too. Many thanks and anomodhana to you. With metta, Betty __________________________ > Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 02:41:29 -0000 > From: Jon > Subject: Re: understanding the "self" concept > > Betty and Howard > > Betty, I thought your post put the position very well. As I > understand it, panna is the very antithesis of moha and wrong view, > and so needs no supplementary conceptualising to do its job. > > Of course, becoming aware (in the conventional sense) of the many > guises and forms that the misconception of self can take is no bad > thing and can only be a supporting condition in the long run for the > exposure of that view to the light of understanding. Howard, I think > this is your point and I am in full agreement on it. > > Betty, do you know of any sutta or commentary references that bear on > this general question? > > Jon > > --- "Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala" > wrote: > > Dear Howard, > > I have enjoyed reading your many posts and wish to address the > question of > > whether it is necessary to understand to any degree the exact > nature of the > > "self" concept before one can experience satipatthana. Though I > have only > > been studying with Acharn Sujin only a short time and am not well > versed in > > the Tipitika, I have come to realize that when panna does indeed > arise, > > there is not only a gradual "letting go" of the "self" concept, but > there is > > also a deeper and increasing realization of that which we had > been "taking" > > for self all along and of the various ways it is so deeply > entrenched. > > Therefore, when panna arises it also gives us an increased > understanding of > > the nature and extent of the "self" concept. So, just by being > aware of the > > realities as they arise, from moment to moment, as Acharn teaches, > is > > enough, and when the conditions are right, panna will rise and > allow further > > understanding of the nature of "self" and the gradual eroding of > the concept > > will occur. > > > > With metta, > > Betty > 5832 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 26, 2001 1:20am Subject: the second Gem A correction: I wrote concerning the word dhamma that the second Gem we pay respect to is nibbana and the eight types of lokuttara cittas experiencing nibbana. I should have written that also the Dhamma that is the Buddha's teachings is included in the second Gem. Nina. 5833 From: Howard Date: Tue Jun 26, 2001 2:28am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Joining Realities into a "Whole" (From 'Cetasikas') Hi, Judy - In a message dated 6/24/01 8:56:06 PM Eastern Daylight Time, <> writes: > Hi, Nina: > I have been reviewing some earlier posts that touch on areas that I am > trying to get a grip on. On June 19, in the post "joining realities into a > whole," > > > Howard wrote: > . We are inclined to join different realities together into a 'whole", > > I am trying to understand *where* the attempted joining of different > > realities occurs. If cittas truly occur as separate, discrete states, then > it > > would seem that such a "joining" would have to occur within a single > citta, > > in which case it is a processing of *memories* of preceding cittas and > their > > cetasikas. Is this so? > > > Nina wrote: > . Then there are after seeing has fallen away other types of cittas which > recognize the meaning of the letters and other ones which think of the story > that was written, and the thinking goes > on and on. It seems that everything is known in one moment, seeing and > recognizing the letters and knowing the meaning, but this is not so. We join > as it were many different phenomena into a whole: the world, we, ourselves > who are unhappy or happy. Indeed, sa~n~naa, remmebrance, which accompanies > each citta plays an important part, but also other cetasikas. > > I have read and reread your response, and do understand it, but I am still > not sure where "conception" takes place. Is this something that would > happen in the sixth consciousness? > > thank you > Judy > ================================== I assume that by "the sixth consciousness" you mean mental consciousness/discernment (mano-vi~n~nana), which has thoughts/ideas/concepts as objects. It seems reasonable to me that this would be the locus of conception. I would imagine that conception amounts to activity of the "recognition" mental concomitant (sa~n~na ) occurring along with an act of *mental* discernment, while the activity of sa~n~na occuring with the other 5 types of discernment would be closer to "perception" than to "conception". [Sa~n~na, as I understand it, in a formative phase produces a "tagged" record of the features of what is currently experienced for future reference, and, later, in a comparative phase, compares the features of what is currently experienced with records produced by previous formative applications of sa~n~na in order to "identify" what is currently experienced, to "pidgeonhole" it.] But this is just what "makes sense" to me. It is based neither on direct knowing nor on knowledge of the Abhidhamma, so I await correction on this. 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) 5834 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Jun 26, 2001 9:29am Subject: Re: Joining Realities into a "Whole" (From 'Cetasikas') Dear Howard, --- Howard wrote: > as objects. It seems reasonable to me that this would be the locus of > conception. I would imagine that conception amounts to activity of the I believe what you are thinking is correct. We had some extensive discussion about this in November 2000. Here's a link: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/1753 If you search under "colour/sound", you may be able to see the entire thread. kom 5835 From: Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2) Date: Tue Jun 26, 2001 9:22am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Respectful Appreciative Gesture Re: Payin g Respect Dear Suan, I am a bit puzzle as in the message that you are trying to convey. I must apologise as my knowledge and wisdom seems immature to understand your point of view fully. Please do elaborate more. May you be well and happy always, Loke CL > -----Original Message----- > From: Suan Lu Zaw [SMTP:Suan Lu Zaw] > Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 12:09 AM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Respectful Appreciative Gesture Re: > Paying Respect > > > > > Dear Loke ChaiLiang > > How are you? > > I am a Buddhist yogi of many, many years. I have > internalised the mental cultivation practice taught by the > Buddha to such an extent that my body and mind do not feel good > if I missed a practice session. The day with a practice session and > the day without one have become sharply different. > > While a practice session is in progress, I experience the benefits of > the practice, and enjoy satisfaction. Together with these good > feelings, I always remember the Buddha and pay respect to him by > raising my two hands in front of my chest with the two palms touching > together. During a practice session, I could not kneel and touch my > forehead on the back of my hands. So my respectful appreciative > gesture is to raise my hands in front of my chest. > > Hope this message would help you figure out the reasons why we pay > respect to the Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha, and our parents. > > > With regards > > > Suan Lu Zaw > > > http://www.bodhiology.org/ > > --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" > wrote: > > Dear list, > > > > Something struck me this morning while I was on my motorcycle > on my > > way to work..... Although I had been a practising Buddhist for > almost 13 > > years.... something came across that I couldn't seem to understand > fully.... > > the question is > > > > > > "Why do we kneel and bring our foreheads down to the back of > our > > hands to pay respects to monks and our teachers....?" > > > > > > Since it was done without knowing in the beginning .... or > understanding and > > now the need to understand arises.. ok ok I was asked by a friend > and I > > couldn't seems to be able to provide a satisfactory answer. Certain > friends > > told me this is to cultivate humility... but is that all ? What > other > > reasons for this actions ? I initially thought it to be some kind of > > tradition and practise.... But I am sure there is more to it... > > > > Any takers ? > > > > May all of you be well and happy always, > > > > Loke CL 5836 From: m. nease Date: Tue Jun 26, 2001 9:55am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Joining Realities into a "Whole" (From 'Cetasikas') Dear Kom and Howard, I must've read this post when it was new, but it meant little to me. In the context of Howard's question it makes perfect sense: According to Porichet VI, which discusses the citta vithi processes, before a process (3) can arise, there must be "thousands" of (1), and (2) processes already taken place repeatedly. By this description, we can deduce that, it is not enough for a single rupa (17 moments of cittas) to condition the cittas to start experiencing pannati. It must take "thousands" of panja-dvara-javana-vithi and mano-dvara-javana vithi, which actually experience poramatha aramana, for the citta to start "organizing" and "arranging" the sense objects into a concept. The concepts also change as the mano-dvara-javana vithi (3), experiencing the concept, repeats. For seeing, in the beginning we may just see an unidentified shape, and then it becomes a familiar shape, and then we may attach a name to the shape. At this point, the process of taking poramatha object all the way to a memorable, identifiable, namable concept is complete: a perfect aramana for upadana to hold on to. Hence, to add to my original comments, the poramatha aramana doesn't become sharper. How can it becomes sharper when it rises and falls away virtually immediately? Only pannati becomes "sharper": the cittas process the aramana object so it become identifiable and namable, and hence, the pannati aramana becomes successively "clearer" in "our" mind. Thank you both very much. mike 5837 From: Howard Date: Tue Jun 26, 2001 9:11am Subject: Re: Joining Realities into a "Whole" (From 'Cetasikas') Hi,. Kom - > I believe what you are thinking is correct. We had some extensive > discussion about this in November 2000. Here's a link: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/1753If you search > under "colour/sound", you may be able to see the entire thread.kom ============================= Thanks for the reference (and your concurrence). 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) 5838 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jun 26, 2001 4:30pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Joining Realities into a "Whole" (From 'Cetasikas') This is a great description Kom and should go into the files links. robert --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Kom and Howard, > > I must've read this post when it was new, but it meant > little to me. In the context of Howard's question it > makes perfect sense: > > According to Porichet VI, which discusses the citta > vithi processes, > before a process (3) can arise, there must be > "thousands" of (1), and (2) > processes already taken place repeatedly. By this > description, we can > deduce that, it is not enough for a single rupa (17 > moments of cittas) to > condition the cittas to start experiencing pannati. > It must > take "thousands" of panja-dvara-javana-vithi and > mano-dvara-javana > vithi, which actually experience poramatha aramana, > for the citta to > start "organizing" and "arranging" the sense objects > into a concept. > > The concepts also change as the mano-dvara-javana > vithi (3), experiencing > the concept, repeats. For seeing, in the beginning we > may just see an > unidentified shape, and then it becomes a familiar > shape, and then we may > attach a name to the shape. At this point, the > process of taking > poramatha object all the way to a memorable, > identifiable, namable > concept is complete: a perfect aramana for upadana to > hold on to. > > Hence, to add to my original comments, the poramatha > aramana doesn't > become sharper. How can it becomes sharper when it > rises and falls away > virtually immediately? Only pannati becomes > "sharper": the cittas > process the aramana object so it become identifiable > and namable, and > hence, the pannati aramana becomes successively > "clearer" in "our" > mind. > > Thank you both very much. > > mike > 5839 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jun 26, 2001 9:52pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Holiday Dear Dan, Thanks so much for all your posts. Recently I liked the exchanges over drugs, especially how you brought in some very subtle points about practice in general. Your challenging letters are going to be sorely missed and we all look forward to your return. Thanks again robert --- Dan wrote: > Hi all, > After a flurry of activity over the past few weeks, I am going > to > have to go on holiday from dsg for a few months. > 5840 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jun 26, 2001 11:19pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Holiday Dan I'll miss your posts. I have particularly appreciated your exchange with Erik on hallucinogens - some very good points which I mean to pick up on. In fact if your recent surge of activity is what happens when you come down with a bout of pneumonia, I have to say I'll be looking forward to the next bout ... Hope you visit us from time to time and share your thoughts. Jon --- Dan wrote: > Hi all, > After a flurry of activity over the past few weeks, I am going to > have to go on holiday from dsg for a few months. > > Jon, I think you are right about samatha and satipatthana, and I > think I am right too. Our language is different, and we both still > need to practice some on expressing exactly what we mean. I thank you > very much for helping shed light on this and so many other things. > > Erik, the debate about hallucinogens has been very valuable for me, > and I hope it has conditioned some reflection on your part too. It's > always a pleasure to lock horns with you! > > Sarah, although it seems like we are 180 degrees apart on the issue > of "no practice", I think we are actually quite close, but again, we > need to keep prodding each other to sharpen our language and the > context of our comments. > > Robert, thanks for all your well-balanced, patient, and insightful > help over the past several months. You have been wonderful every step > of the way. Most recently, our mini-discussion of "faith vs. works" > (to use the Christian language) was of immense help to me. > > Mike, it's great to have you back. Thanks for your encouragement. > > Howard, Num, Kom, Herman, Loke, Bhante D.(the Ven. explanation > point!), Joe, and whoever else I'm missing, I haven't interacted much > with you, but it's been fun reading your posts. > > Lurkers, your reading in the future will be much easier without me! > > > I hope to be back around Christmas, but I may pop in every once in > while for a comment or two. > > Best regards, all! > > Dan 5841 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Wed Jun 27, 2001 0:25am Subject: Respectful Appreciative Gesture Re: Payin g Respect Dear Loke ChaiLiang How are you? Sorry if my message did not click. Well, it is a bit wordy anyway. I will try again in this message. Here comes. Paying respect to the Buddha is not necessarily done mindlessly. We could do it with full understanding and emotion as I described in my last message. I pay respect to the Buddha with sincere emotion conditioned by meditative understanding. I sometimes thought what I would have looked like if the Buddha's teachings had not tamed me. I believe I would surely have become a great savage if I did not have a chance to learn and practise the mental cultivation methods taught by the Buddha. The Buddha has saved me from becoming a savage. Whenever I remeber this and whenever I enjoy the benefits of Buddhist mental cultivation practices, I pay respect to the Buddha with deep emotion and deep appreciation. I hope this message contains useful insights for you and makes your life easier. With regards Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" wrote: > Dear Suan, > > I am a bit puzzle as in the message that you are trying to convey. I > must apologise as my knowledge and wisdom seems immature to understand your > point of view fully. Please do elaborate more. > > May you be well and happy always, > > Loke CL > > > -----Original Message----- > > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Respectful Appreciative Gesture Re: > > Paying Respect > > > > > > > > > > Dear Loke ChaiLiang > > > > How are you? > > > > I am a Buddhist yogi of many, many years. I have > > internalised the mental cultivation practice taught by the > > Buddha to such an extent that my body and mind do not feel good > > if I missed a practice session. The day with a practice session and > > the day without one have become sharply different. > > > > While a practice session is in progress, I experience the benefits of > > the practice, and enjoy satisfaction. Together with these good > > feelings, I always remember the Buddha and pay respect to him by > > raising my two hands in front of my chest with the two palms touching > > together. During a practice session, I could not kneel and touch my > > forehead on the back of my hands. So my respectful appreciative > > gesture is to raise my hands in front of my chest. > > > > Hope this message would help you figure out the reasons why we pay > > respect to the Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha, and our parents. > > > > > > With regards > > > > > > Suan Lu Zaw > > > > > > http://www.bodhiology.org/ > > > > --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" > > wrote: > > > Dear list, > > > > > > Something struck me this morning while I was on my motorcycle > > on my > > > way to work..... Although I had been a practising Buddhist for > > almost 13 > > > years.... something came across that I couldn't seem to understand > > fully.... > > > the question is > > > > > > > > > "Why do we kneel and bring our foreheads down to the back of > > our > > > hands to pay respects to monks and our teachers....?" > > > > > > > > > Since it was done without knowing in the beginning .... or > > understanding and > > > now the need to understand arises.. ok ok I was asked by a friend > > and I > > > couldn't seems to be able to provide a satisfactory answer. Certain > > friends > > > told me this is to cultivate humility... but is that all ? What > > other > > > reasons for this actions ? I initially thought it to be some kind of > > > tradition and practise.... But I am sure there is more to it... > > > > > > Any takers ? > > > > > > May all of you be well and happy always, > > > > > > Loke CL 5842 From: Erik Date: Wed Jun 27, 2001 1:00am Subject: Re: Holiday --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear Dan, > Thanks so much for all your posts. Recently I liked the > exchanges over drugs, especially how you brought in some very > subtle points about practice in general. > Your challenging letters are going to be sorely missed and we > all look forward to your return. > Thanks again > robert Seconded, thirded, all of that. Dan, your keen insights will be sorely missed. Get back here soon, please. 5843 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 27, 2001 1:22am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] concepts op 25-06-2001 03:53 schreef jlsallis op : > I have been reviewing some earlier posts that touch on areas that I am > trying to get a grip on. On June 19, in the post "joining realities into a > whole," > >Nina: We join > as it were many different phenomena into a whole: the world, we, ourselves > who are unhappy or happy. Indeed, sa~n~naa, remmebrance, which accompanies > each citta plays an important part, but also other cetasikas. > > I have read and reread your response, and do understand it, but I am still > not sure where "conception" takes place. Is this something that would > happen in the sixth consciousness? Dear Judy, Seeing experiences colour, that what is visible. Seeing arises within a process of cittas all of which experience visible object. After the cittas of the eye-door process have fallen away, the visible object which has only just fallen away is experienced through the mind-door, by cittas arising in a succeeding mind-door process. And after that there may be other mind-door processes of cittas which think of concepts, such as shape and form, the meaning of something, the name of it. I shall quote from Acharn Sujin's which is part of her Survey of Paramattha Dhammas (you can find on the Zolag Web or Robert"s Web Abhidhamma Vipassana): We can begin to find out the difference between the moments a nama or rupa is the object of citta and the moments we are thinking of concepts. In that way we shall come to know what is real in the ultimate sense and what is real only in conventional sense. We can find this out even now, while staring at the computer screen. Are we absorbed in our mail? Most of the time we are thinking of concepts. We can find out now what is real in the ultimate sense and what is not. When you read Realities and Concepts many things will become clearer to you. With metta, Nina. 5844 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 27, 2001 1:22am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: encouragement op 24-06-2001 16:37 schreef Erik op Erik: I just wanted to > thank you profusely for taking the time to write and > share "Abhidhamma in Daily Life." It changed my life. Dear Eric, thank you for your very kind words which really encourage me to continue writing. I appreciate it so much when people have an interest in the study of the Abhidhamma. I should mention that Acharn Sujin inspired me to write and that I used her ideas in all my books. With metta, Nina. 5845 From: Howard Date: Wed Jun 27, 2001 5:25am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Holiday Hi, Dan , if you are still "here" - In a message dated 6/26/01 7:56:09 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Erik writes: > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > wrote: > > Dear Dan, > > Thanks so much for all your posts. Recently I liked the > > exchanges over drugs, especially how you brought in some very > > subtle points about practice in general. > > Your challenging letters are going to be sorely missed and we > > all look forward to your return. > > Thanks again > > robert > > Seconded, thirded, all of that. Dan, your keen insights will be > sorely missed. Get back here soon, please. > > ======================== If it is possible, I would like to "fourth" this! ;-) 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) 5846 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Wed Jun 27, 2001 0:19pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Holiday "Fifth" that from a lurker. -----Original Message----- From: Howard Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 7:26 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Holiday Hi, Dan , if you are still "here" - In a message dated 6/26/01 7:56:09 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Erik writes: > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > wrote: > > Dear Dan, > > Thanks so much for all your posts. Recently I liked the > > exchanges over drugs, especially how you brought in some very > > subtle points about practice in general. > > Your challenging letters are going to be sorely missed and we > > all look forward to your return. > > Thanks again > > robert > > Seconded, thirded, all of that. Dan, your keen insights will be > sorely missed. Get back here soon, please. > > ======================== If it is possible, I would like to "fourth" this! ;-) 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) 5847 From: m. nease Date: Wed Jun 27, 2001 7:40pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Joining Realities into a "Whole" (From 'Cetasikas') p.s. Would it be accurate to say that what sañña 'marks' is aarammana, and that then the 'marked' aarammana is inherited by each subsequent citta (as anusaya? sankhara-khanda?) for future recognition by sañña when there are conditions for its rearising? If not, what is it that's 'marked' by sañña and how is it carried forward for future recognition? Thanks in advance. mike --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > This is a great description Kom and should go into > the files > links. > robert > > According to Porichet VI, which discusses the > citta > > vithi processes, > > before a process (3) can arise, there must be > > "thousands" of (1), and (2) > > processes already taken place repeatedly. By this > > description, we can > > deduce that, it is not enough for a single rupa > (17 > > moments of cittas) to > > condition the cittas to start experiencing > pannati. > > It must > > take "thousands" of panja-dvara-javana-vithi and > > mano-dvara-javana > > vithi, which actually experience poramatha > aramana, > > for the citta to > > start "organizing" and "arranging" the sense > objects > > into a concept. > > > > The concepts also change as the mano-dvara-javana > > vithi (3), experiencing > > the concept, repeats. For seeing, in the > beginning we > > may just see an > > unidentified shape, and then it becomes a familiar > > shape, and then we may > > attach a name to the shape. At this point, the > > process of taking > > poramatha object all the way to a memorable, > > identifiable, namable > > concept is complete: a perfect aramana for upadana > to > > hold on to. > > > > Hence, to add to my original comments, the > poramatha > > aramana doesn't > > become sharper. How can it becomes sharper when > it > > rises and falls away > > virtually immediately? Only pannati becomes > > "sharper": the cittas > > process the aramana object so it become > identifiable > > and namable, and > > hence, the pannati aramana becomes successively > > "clearer" in "our" > > mind. > > > > Thank you both very much. 5848 From: Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala Date: Wed Jun 27, 2001 8:37pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Digest Number 433: psychedelic substances Dear Eric, Please allow me to give my input re: your idea that "drugs" played a part in the growth of understanding of dhamma for you. I know this is almost a month out of date, but please forgive me for being so far behind. In the course of studying abhidhamma, I have learned that any object, be it a drug or anything else, to which we assign a name, the mind door cognizes as a pannati (concept). In reality, the concepts our "minds" create are made up of component paramattha dhammas, realities. The drug is made up of various kinds of rupa, right? And as paramattha dhamma, these rupas are sangkhata/sangkhara, i.e., conditioned. All conditioned dhammas have 3 characteristics: they are anatta, anicca and dukkha. The rupas that make up ecstasy, or whatever it is called, are impermanent, they never last; they only rise and immediately fall away. The pannati that is ecstasy: does it last? If it did, you would not have to continually take more and more of it, would you, in order to achieve whatever "high" it gives you. And, upon coming down from the "high", what is the feeling? Is it pleasant or unpleasant? If you contemplate it carefully, you will see that it is also dukkha: the pleasant feeling the drug gives you does not last and unpleasant feeling then sets in, right? There is no soul or self in the rupas that make up the drug either. Furthermore, the drug is taken because it becomes associated with very pleasant feelings which are lobha, and accumulations, habits, build up. Habits become addictive, yes? Does all this sound like a description of kusala to you? Kusala actions, on the other hand, have been defined mainly as following sila, performing dana (generosity), and developing bhavana. If you will notice, the last precept of sila talks about refraining from alcohol (I have no idea what other mind altering substances existed in Buddha's day). We are asked to refrain from alcohol, or substances such as ecstasy, which, when taken in sufficient quantities, are mind altering. In abhidhamma terms, this means that the citta that arise at the various sense doors to cognize visible objects, sounds, smells, etc. are not "working" and the sense door/mind door processes do not occur fully. How much is cognized of the outside world or remembered, when one is drunk, or one is in the throws of a high? Isn't the memory of that time hazy? One does not know what one is doing, in conceptual terms, when one is drunk or high. If one cannot cognize the realities that are appearing through the sense doors, then sati and panna cannot arise while one is "under the influence", can it? It is only when panna arises that we understand the nature of realities/dhammas. So, please explain to me how drugs can help you to understand "the" dhamma? Would you be able to learn the dhamma without the use of substances such as ecstasy? This has not been sent to be critical, but to ask you to think about what is written here and to know it has been sent with metta, Betty > > --- Erik wrote: > --- Jonothan > Abbott wrote: > > > > --- Erik wrote: > > > > > What I didn't realize was I'd never make any progress so long > as > > > my > > > > > mind was defiled by so much craving, anger, etc. When I was > > > given > > > > > the practice of tonglen (Tibetan metta-bhabvana) it purified > so > > > much > > > > > in a few months of practice it got rid of enough of the > > > hindrances to > > > > > make meditation possible. It sure made me feel like a million > > > bucks. > > > > > That, and a little MDMA chemotherapy, which helped me > identify > > > > > samatha (helped bring about kaya & citta passadhi and a big > > > AHA!), > > > > > plus the bliss of tummo yoga, brought it all together for me. > > > > > > > > Erik > > > > Sorry, but what is MDMN chemotherapy? > > > > > > I have no idea what MDMN would be. MDMA is > > > methelynedioxymethamphetamine, otherwise known as Ecstasy, X, > > > whatever. You know, the stuff they are throwing people in jail > for. > > > > And I suppose Timothy Leary was your guru?! > > All psychedelic drugs are my gurus, as are all people and all life > situations. In my own case, these drugs have served as one of the > most important tools of my entire practice. I wouldn't even be a > Buddhist save for the grace of a POWERFUL Dhamma experience with LSD > at age sixteen, that began the process of destroying the > indoctrination I receives as a kid into my parents' religion. It is > powerful medicine to counteract "hardening of the categories." I > think everyone with a healthy mind should have at least a few > psychedelic experiences in their lifetime in a controlled setting. > > > If Ecstacy and yogic breathing helped you see/experience something > that your studies of the dhamma > > had not led you to see/experience, that would suggest that the > something was not the dhamma or > > anything to do with kusala. > > What specifically would suggest it is neither dhamma nor kusala? Do > psychedelic drugs possess some unique entity in all the triple-realm > that makes them entirely different from all other phenomena? > > I am very curious to see how these composed entities--psychedelic > drugs--could possibly possess any substantial entity such that they > MUST be akusala or adhamma by way of their own sabhava. Because that > is essentially what you are suggesting. And if that is the meaning of > what you're saying, then it is miccha-ditthi, plain and simple. > Because it denies both anatta and kamma. It denies anatta by > suggesting that there are self-existent entities that possess > intrinsically akusala nature. And it denies kamma at the same time > via denial of anatta, as well as denial of the fact that all > experience, kusala or akusala, arises with kamma-vipaka paccaya, > meaning that there is no inherent reality to these drugs apart from > kamma-vipaka, and that it is vipaka that determines their relative > usefulness (or lack thereof). So the only akusala or adhamma I can > see here is that species of miccha-ditthi that is denying both anatta > and kamma. > 5849 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Wed Jun 27, 2001 10:54pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Holiday Dan, I fully agree with Rob here. Take care of your health, and pop in when you can. Many thanks for all your help and support. Sarah --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear Dan, > Thanks so much for all your posts. Recently I liked the > exchanges over drugs, especially how you brought in some very > subtle points about practice in general. > Your challenging letters are going to be sorely missed and we > all look forward to your return. > Thanks again > robert > --- Dan wrote: > > Hi all, > > After a flurry of activity over the past few weeks, I am going > > to > > have to go on holiday from dsg for a few months. > > 5850 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jun 27, 2001 11:14pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Respectful Appreciative Gesture Re: Paying Respect Dear Lu Zaw Welcome to the list. We are glad to have you with us. I have seen your name on a post that Robert forwarded from another list, and I can tell that you have considerable interest in the texts and in Pali. Please tell us a little about yourself and your interest in Dhamma if you feel inclined. I look forward to your contribution to our discussions. Jonothan --- Suan Lu Zaw wrote: > > > > Dear Loke ChaiLiang > > How are you? > > I am a Buddhist yogi of many, many years. I have > internalised the mental cultivation practice taught by the > Buddha to such an extent that my body and mind do not feel good > if I missed a practice session. The day with a practice session and > the day without one have become sharply different. > > While a practice session is in progress, I experience the benefits of > the practice, and enjoy satisfaction. Together with these good > feelings, I always remember the Buddha and pay respect to him by > raising my two hands in front of my chest with the two palms touching > together. During a practice session, I could not kneel and touch my > forehead on the back of my hands. So my respectful appreciative > gesture is to raise my hands in front of my chest. > > Hope this message would help you figure out the reasons why we pay > respect to the Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha, and our parents. > > > With regards > > > Suan Lu Zaw > > > http://www.bodhiology.org/ > > --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" > wrote: > > Dear list, > > > > Something struck me this morning while I was on my motorcycle > on my > > way to work..... Although I had been a practising Buddhist for > almost 13 > > years.... something came across that I couldn't seem to understand > fully.... > > the question is > > > > > > "Why do we kneel and bring our foreheads down to the back of > our > > hands to pay respects to monks and our teachers....?" > > > > > > Since it was done without knowing in the beginning .... or > understanding and > > now the need to understand arises.. ok ok I was asked by a friend > and I > > couldn't seems to be able to provide a satisfactory answer. Certain > friends > > told me this is to cultivate humility... but is that all ? What > other > > reasons for this actions ? I initially thought it to be some kind of > > tradition and practise.... But I am sure there is more to it... > > > > Any takers ? > > > > May all of you be well and happy always, > > > > Loke CL 5851 From: Erik Date: Thu Jun 28, 2001 0:37am Subject: Re: Digest Number 433: psychedelic substances --- "Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala" wrote: > The pannati that is ecstasy: does it > last? If it did, you would not have to continually take more and more of it, > would you, in order to achieve whatever "high" it gives you. Hi Betty. I think the problem in this debate has been what, specifically, is the function and role chemicals can provide in relation to meditation practice/awakening. I want to be clear (perhaps I haven't been) that there is no seeking of a "high" being endorsed here. Those sensations, like all others, are anicca, dukkha, anatta as you note, and and clinging to anything of course leads to dukkha. So I agree 100% that seeking "highs" is totally counter to the Dhamma. The Dhamma exists to help us discover the vision that sees things as they truly are: as impermanent, suffering, and not- self. The specific argument for drugs as an adjunct (not replacement) to meditation practice centers on their helpfulness, with one properly trained and with the appropriate accumulations, to act as support conditions for bhavana. So there is no seeking a "high." In the same way one uses "external" props like seclusion, etc. as aids to meditation, the same can apply to certain drugs in the right context. They can help by supporting samatha, leading to improved conditions for insight and mental clarity (yes, mental clarity). That is the crux of the argument. To be as clear as possible here, no one is suggesting these are shortcuts (because no shortcuts exist). No one is suggesting "take a pill, get enlightened." Far from it! ALL the practices one normally does are still necessary; dana, sila, bhavana, in other words. However, it has been observed that in certain circumstances they have helped people of certain accumulations accelerate more quickly in their meditation practice than they would have otherwise. To me this indicates further study is needed. If they can used for benefit, have already demonstrated that benefit for many (and this is indisputable: even many highly respected Dhamma teachers today came to the Dhamma through this gateway), then the hows and whys need to be explored in depth, to gain clear knowledge one way or another. This requires open- minded exploration, and a willingness to take a few calculated risks. The fact is these things didn't exist in the Buddha's day, but do now, and given their prevalence in society, we can't ignore them; they aren't going away. If anything, they are only becoming more popular. I believe for this reason serious exporation needs to be done that leads to a clearer understanding of all the ramifications of this idea from the Buddhist perspective. > There is no soul or self in the rupas that make > up the drug either. Right, hence, it is the intention and understanding of the person taking them that determines whether they are helpful or harmful. If one is trained in Right View, I see no problem, because Right View knows enough not to take experiences for "self," that all experience is merely the arising and passing away of dhammas. > Furthermore, the drug is taken because it becomes > associated with very pleasant feelings which are lobha, and accumulations, > habits, build up. Habits become addictive, yes? Does all this sound like a > description of kusala to you? The fact the jhanas can engender lobha presents an identical risk. Yet used wisely, not attaching to any mental states that arise, seeing them as anicca, dukkha, anatta, the jhanas present more limited risk. The same is true for any chemicals. The same is true for any pleasant sensations, to any degree, even the supercharged bliss-states of jhana said to be powerful enough to levitate a meditator. > Kusala actions, on the other hand, have been defined mainly as following > sila, performing dana (generosity), and developing bhavana. If you will > notice, the last precept of sila talks about refraining from alcohol (I have > no idea what other mind altering substances existed in Buddha's day). We are > asked to refrain from alcohol, or substances such as ecstasy, which, when > taken in sufficient quantities, are mind altering. The precept refers specifically to intoxicants that lead to heedlessness. And even alcohol can be medicine in certain circumstances. Again, this is not about seeking highs, but about geting rid of the search for highs altogether, to see things as they truly are. In some cases drugs like ecstasy have been used to help condition alobha and adosa, for example, used as adjuncts to metta- bhavana. > So, please explain to me how drugs can help you to understand "the" dhamma? > Would you be able to learn the dhamma without the use of substances such as > ecstasy? One can certainly learn the Dhamma from reading, listening, reflecting. But how deep can that knowledge go if it isn't supported with meditation? It is very easy to talk about pannati and paramattha dhammas, but the difference between the concept of these things and the reality is like night and day. Their reality must be experienced directly. Anything that can assist this process in any way deserves to be thoroughly explored, and any results made available, as with any scientific experiment--which is really the spirit in which this is being suggested. Thank you for your comments Betty! I greatly appreciate your insights. 5852 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Thu Jun 28, 2001 0:42am Subject: Respectful Appreciative Gesture Re: A Short Note To Jonothan Abbott Dear Jonothan Abbott How are you? Thank you for your kind welcome. There is not much to say about myself, I am afraid. However, you could visit my website to have a glance at what I have been doing. URL: http://www.bodhiology.org/ I have been trying to turn the Buddhist Studies from an Arts subject into a scientific discipline. A very ambitious pursuit! A tall order! With regards Suan Lu Zaw http://bodhiology.org/ --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Dear Lu Zaw > > Welcome to the list. We are glad to have you with us. I have seen your > name on a post that Robert forwarded from another list, and I can tell > that you have considerable interest in the texts and in Pali. Please tell > us a little about yourself and your interest in Dhamma if you feel > inclined. > > I look forward to your contribution to our discussions. > > Jonothan > 5853 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 28, 2001 1:07am Subject: Triple Gem Dear Kom, you wanted to know where to find texts on the Triple Gem we pay respect to: the commentary to the Minor Readings, Khuddaka Patha, which is the Illustrator of Ultimate Meaning, Paramatthajotika. The section on the Three Refuges. Here you find the meaning of the Dhamma which is Gem. Also in the Visuddhimagga, Recollections on the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha. Nina. 5854 From: Dan Date: Thu Jun 28, 2001 9:51am Subject: Summary of drugs, samatha, and vipassana Before I go, just a few quick notes I've been working on lately. 1. Really, the use of hallucinogens to directly condition insight is not fundamentally different from the use of formal meditation to directly condition insight. The difference is that with the hallucinogens, the perceptions are stronger and less disciplined than they are with the conventional formal sitting, which, among many other consequences, makes it even MORE difficult to get over the "imperfections" of insight, the attachments to insights that do arise, the attachments to any fruits of concentration that do arise. Samatha and/or drugs do not help cause insight to arise, or to make it easier for it to arise. However, samatha and/or drugs can make some kinds of insight appear "sharper" or "stronger" when other conditions have resulted in the arising of a moment of insight. This can make the arising of insight a dangerous trap, as explained below. What an unfortunate turn of events! As Jon wrote: "If we have the idea of a direct and immediate connection between [samatha and satipatthana], and we `practice' samatha with a view to having stronger satipatthana, I fear the result could be more akusala than kusala." How so? I don't know exactly what Jon was thinking, but here's an idea. Let's just suppose that moments of insight do arise, and the experience seems to match the descriptions in Vism. XX and XXI (e.g. "As he is estimating and judging material and immaterial states perhaps knowledge that is unerring, keen, incisive, and very sharp arises in him, like a lightening flash"[Vism. XX 114] or "...the meditator thinks, 'Such illumination never arose in me before. I have surely reached the path, reached fruition'"[Vism. XX 107]). When moments of insight arise during the course of 'formal sitting' or on a drug trip---mind calm, even perhaps at the level of access concentration---the insight may arise as brilliant flashes, where some aspect of the Dhamma appears crystal clear, strikingly clear for a few jolting moments. The clarity of these moments is no doubt enhanced by the "formal" setting or the drug effects. What happens in the next moments is telling, though, and is what separates corruptions from cleaner insight [Vism. XX.124]: Does attachment to these moments of insight arise as "[Insight] has arisen in me", or "How agreeable this [insight] that has arisen is" [Vism. XX.125]? Or does understanding arise: "This [insight] has arisen. But it is impermanent..." [Vism. XX.126]. When the impingement of an insight is more jolting, is the reaction more likely to be rooted in attachment? Of course, it depends on the accumulations and the conditions at the moment. But corrupt insight---i.e., insight in one moment, strong attachment following---seems to be such a pervasive and persistent problem for Western lay meditators (in addition to the pervasive and persistent problem of confusing fruits of concentration with fruits of insight)! I have a theory: If samatha-charged or drug- charged mundane insights arise without no clear vision about what-is-and-what-is-not-the-path, the result is attachment to the insight and a reinforcing of sakayaditthi ("Insight has arisen in me!"). Also, because the meditator (wrongly) associates the insight with the practice of samatha or to the drug's effects, there is a reinforcing of silabbataparamasa ("This practice led to this insight"). The problem is that in an undeveloped mind, little flashes of insight are met with attachment or incorrectly interpreted. The reaction to the flashes is not something that can be controlled at the moment. It happens too quickly. These "imperfections of insight" [Vism. XX.105- 124] are incredibly alluring and terribly difficult to overcome. The actual moments of insight are kusala, but the reaction to them is typically akusala until the knowledge of what is and what is not the Path is firmly established. One sign that "tender insight knowledge" [Vism. XX.104] is maturing is when the reaction to the states is based on the "...discovery that states have no curiosity..." [Vism. XX 105], i.e. the states themselves lose their allure. There is no interest in the particular meditation experiences because they are mere perceptions, not intrinsically different from other perceptions. As long as the experiences hold some allure and curiosity for the meditator, clear understanding of what is and what is not the Path has not matured. One danger of using samatha or drugs as a tool for developing insight, is that the experiences tend to be oh-so-much-more- interesting than everyday realities, so what would be a rare and precious insight (viz. the "discovery that the states have no curiosity") becomes much more difficultly attained. This is ESPECIALLY true with drugs, because the perceptions are even stronger than with regular meditation and the discipline required for these perceptions to arise is weaker. Everyday realities are certainly not as spectacular, but is the point to experience spectacular sensations or to understand the individual essences of states [Vism. XIV.7]? If the former, then drugs are the way to go. If the latter, then spectacular perceptions is an impediment because such perceptions are so easy to form attachment to [lobha---hmmm...one of the hindrances; isn't samatha or the drug supposed to suppress these?! Yes, but what happens the next moment? Insight or attachment?]. Dan 5855 From: Dan Date: Thu Jun 28, 2001 9:52am Subject: "Progress in insight" Without the understanding of what is and what is not path being firmly established, perceptions or experiences arising in meditation are not indicators of deep insights, even when the perception matches that of the descriptions of the vipassana-ñana found in Vism. XXI and XXII (and elsewhere, such as Mahasi's "Progress in Insight"). When insight is met with a reaction along the lines of "'This [insight] has arisen. But it is impermanent, formed, ..." [Vism. XX 126], the wisdom is maturing. Unfortunately, the difference between this kind of reaction and the reaction "insight has arisen in me" may not be easy to recognize. The problem is that thinking that mimics the wise reaction can arise very soon after the original reaction based on ditthi has already arisen. In that case, the insight was corrupt, but the mind did not recognize the corruption; the meditator can be convinced of great progress in insight because of some particular perceptions that arose in the course of meditation. Because the thoughts can arise so quickly, it is not easy to discern whether the reaction was rooted in ditthi, mana, or tanha, or whether it was rooted in wisdom. Until this discernment is solid, the insight remains tender. These differences between reactions based on ditthi or panna are subtle and not easy to note at the time or even at a later time in reviewing. However, if the insight is tender, the unwise reaction is evident in later actions and thoughts and speech. For example, from time to time on the DSG list, there is discussion of how setting goals for practice or progress, or even being interested in progress at all is not only a sign of miccha ditthi, but is a major obstacle to the arising of insight. When tender insight arises (i.e. insight followed by a reaction rooted in tanha, ditthi, or mana), there is a tendency to think: "I have attained this. I aim to attain that"---all rooted in false view! Also, when the insight is tender (or absent, in the case of some "interesting" perceptions that might arise), the differences between insight, samadhi, perception, and attachment are not clearly distinguished. There is a tendency to think: "If I do such and such, then insight will arise," or "Satipatthana is attained by sitting in a corner and quietly directing the attention to x, y, or z." These thoughts are silabbataparamasa (believing in the efficacy of a particular activity) and closely related to sakayaditthi---the idea that "I" can do this or that to cause wisdom to arise. After tender insight knowledge has arisen, other insights (resembling bhanga-ñana, baya-nana, etc. [Vism. XXI]) can arise too, but each of these insights remains tender, fleeting, and weak, even when they have a flash-like appearance and seemingly great depth. When these phenomena (as described in Vism.) are met with attachment, they really are not bhanga-ñana, baya-nana, etc. even though there is superficial resemblance to Vism. XXI. When strongly developed, there is no thinking "I have this insight" or thinking "I am at this stage of progress." In fact, this thinking about "progress" is such a pernicious obstacle that Ven. Mahasi Sayadaw has been accused of having "extreme miccha ditthi" by one very knowledgeable dsg'er, presumably because of the Venerable's well- known penchant for talking so much about "progress in insight"! The "extreme miccha ditthi" comment may be a little extreme, but if one takes too lightly the descriptions of "progress" in insight given in Vism. XXI and XXII, it is indeed a harmful form of miccha ditthi. When people first hear about Buddhism (especially Westerners), there is a big tendency to think in terms of progress. So they hear about the "stages" of "progress", read about them, and imagine themselves to have attained high levels of insight when their experiences match the descriptions of perceptions that may arise at the time deep insights, strong insights arise. Phenomena arising in meditation are not a reliable measure of understanding; understanding is better measured in terms of evidence of arising of taints and fetters in everyday living, e.g. the taint of finding the meditation experiences intrinsically interesting (attachment). As progress advances, there is less and less desire to measure progress. 5856 From: Dan Date: Thu Jun 28, 2001 9:52am Subject: Thanks To Jon, Sarah, and Robert After the discussions over the past few weeks, I have to praise your pedagogy. I used to fault it because I knew there were so many meditators on the dsg that kept remarking about how discouraging it all sounded. You all seemed to discourage meditators, and I think you do indeed discourage some meditators and turn them away. Despite knowing that your words were right, I thought the pedagogy was wrong: "Why discourage meditation (in the sense of formal practice)? People are bound to understand sakayaditthi and silabbataparamasa as they work. For crying out loud, encourage the work!" And I encouraged it and battled you all back and forth over it for 8 months or so. I kept telling my wife about how you were right on doctrine but wrong on pedagogy. I'm now coming to grip with just how big of an issue the "imperfections" are, how closely tied to the fetters they are, and how a samatha practice (or drug) can so easily make this obstacle to basic understanding even more pronounced (or as Jon wrote: "[If] we `practice' samatha with a view to having stronger satipatthana, I fear the result could be more akusala than kusala."). Kudos. I'll now tell my wife that I was wrong: You guys are right on doctrine and right on pedagogy. It is important to emphasize what is path and what is not path from the beginning [sammaditthi], even if some find it discouraging because they would rather cling to a practice. Thanks for your work to make this clear to so many people. You are true knights of Dhamma. Dan 5857 From: m. nease Date: Thu Jun 28, 2001 9:58am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Thanks Dan. Don't be a stranger, eh? And regards to the wife. mike 5858 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Thu Jun 28, 2001 11:25am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Thanks This is a real nice tribute for the pioneers! :o) -----Original Message----- From: Dan [mailto:Dan] Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 7:53 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Thanks To Jon, Sarah, and Robert After the discussions over the past few weeks, I have to praise your pedagogy. I used to fault it because I knew there were so many meditators on the dsg that kept remarking about how discouraging it all sounded. You all seemed to discourage meditators, and I think you do indeed discourage some meditators and turn them away. Despite knowing that your words were right, I thought the pedagogy was wrong: "Why discourage meditation (in the sense of formal practice)? People are bound to understand sakayaditthi and silabbataparamasa as they work. For crying out loud, encourage the work!" And I encouraged it and battled you all back and forth over it for 8 months or so. I kept telling my wife about how you were right on doctrine but wrong on pedagogy. I'm now coming to grip with just how big of an issue the "imperfections" are, how closely tied to the fetters they are, and how a samatha practice (or drug) can so easily make this obstacle to basic understanding even more pronounced (or as Jon wrote: "[If] we `practice' samatha with a view to having stronger satipatthana, I fear the result could be more akusala than kusala."). Kudos. I'll now tell my wife that I was wrong: You guys are right on doctrine and right on pedagogy. It is important to emphasize what is path and what is not path from the beginning [sammaditthi], even if some find it discouraging because they would rather cling to a practice. Thanks for your work to make this clear to so many people. You are true knights of Dhamma. Dan 5859 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Jun 28, 2001 0:39pm Subject: Re: Summary of drugs, samatha, and vipassana & Progress to Insights Dear Dan, Thanks for the well-thought-out (and researched) summary. I have no idea whether it is possible to have insights in a drug-induced state, but I thought of the possible parallel situations between the drug-induced states and the meditation-induced states, and reflected on the attachments I had during such a meditation session. Buddha's dhamma (and the lobha) is indeed subtle, hard-to-see, and most confounding to the run-of-the-mill, averaged men, far from Ariyans, obstructed by the lobha, conceits, and wrong views accumulated for the countless time. Such wisdom is rare and precious indeed. Anumodhana, kom --- Dan wrote: > Before I go, just a few quick notes I've been working on lately. 5860 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Thu Jun 28, 2001 1:01pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Summary of drugs, samatha, and vipassa na & Progress to Insights Dear all, I hav been lurking thru this magnificient thread about drugs and hallux. (I may have misinterpreted what you were discussing, if so my apologies..) Personally I think that if there was at least some amount of help from these substances for the 'path', buddha would have mentioned that, in compassion for the ones who will benefit by it. Being buddha, knowing all possibilities, he would have given the discourses about how to prepare and use them, . Eventhough some may suggest that it was impossible to produce these fine substances during those long gone days with primitive technology, I personally think that area of medicine was quite advanced at that time. "Buddha's dhamma (and the lobha) is indeed subtle, hard-to-see, and most confounding to the run-of-the-mill, averaged men, far from Ariyans, obstructed by the lobha, conceits, and wrong views accumulated for the countless time. Such wisdom is rare and precious indeed." Sharp as a knife Kom! Regards -----Original Message----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 10:40 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Summary of drugs, samatha, and vipassana & Progress to Insights Dear Dan, Thanks for the well-thought-out (and researched) summary. I have no idea whether it is possible to have insights in a drug-induced state, but I thought of the possible parallel situations between the drug-induced states and the meditation-induced states, and reflected on the attachments I had during such a meditation session. Buddha's dhamma (and the lobha) is indeed subtle, hard-to-see, and most confounding to the run-of-the-mill, averaged men, far from Ariyans, obstructed by the lobha, conceits, and wrong views accumulated for the countless time. Such wisdom is rare and precious indeed. Anumodhana, kom --- Dan wrote: > Before I go, just a few quick notes I've been working on lately. 5861 From: Sukinderpal Narula Date: Thu Jun 28, 2001 6:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] "Progress in insight" Sadhu! Sadhu! Sadhu! Like your style. Another one who will miss your contributions. Sukin. Dan wrote: > Without the understanding of what is and what is not path being > firmly established, perceptions or experiences arising in meditation > are not indicators of deep insights, even when the perception matches > that of the descriptions of the vipassana-ñana found in Vism. XXI and > XXII (and elsewhere, such as Mahasi's "Progress in Insight"). > > When insight is met with a reaction along the lines of "'This > [insight] has arisen. But it is impermanent, formed, ..." [Vism. XX > 126], the wisdom is maturing. Unfortunately, the difference between > this kind of reaction and the reaction "insight has arisen in me" may > not be easy to recognize. The problem is that thinking that mimics > the wise reaction can arise very soon after the original reaction > based on ditthi has already arisen. In that case, the insight was > corrupt, but the mind did not recognize the corruption; the meditator > can be convinced of great progress in insight because of some > particular perceptions that arose in the course of meditation. > Because the thoughts can arise so quickly, it is not easy to discern > whether the reaction was rooted in ditthi, mana, or tanha, or whether > it was rooted in wisdom. Until this discernment is solid, the insight > remains tender. > > These differences between reactions based on ditthi or panna are > subtle and not easy to note at the time or even at a later time in > reviewing. However, if the insight is tender, the unwise reaction is > evident in later actions and thoughts and speech. For example, from > time to time on the DSG list, there is discussion of how setting > goals for practice or progress, or even being interested in progress > at all is not only a sign of miccha ditthi, but is a major obstacle > to the arising of insight. When tender insight arises (i.e. insight > followed by a reaction rooted in tanha, ditthi, or mana), there is a > tendency to think: "I have attained this. I aim to attain that"---all > rooted in false view! Also, when the insight is tender (or absent, in > the case of some "interesting" perceptions that might arise), the > differences between insight, samadhi, perception, and attachment are > not clearly distinguished. There is a tendency to think: "If I do > such and such, then insight will arise," or "Satipatthana is attained > by sitting in a corner and quietly directing the attention to x, y, > or z." These thoughts are silabbataparamasa (believing in the > efficacy of a particular activity) and closely related to > sakayaditthi---the idea that "I" can do this or that to cause wisdom > to arise. > > After tender insight knowledge has arisen, other insights (resembling > bhanga-ñana, baya-nana, etc. [Vism. XXI]) can arise too, but each of > these insights remains tender, fleeting, and weak, even when they > have a flash-like appearance and seemingly great depth. When these > phenomena (as described in Vism.) are met with attachment, they > really are not bhanga-ñana, baya-nana, etc. even though there is > superficial resemblance to Vism. XXI. > > When strongly developed, there is no thinking "I have this insight" > or thinking "I am at this stage of progress." In fact, this thinking > about "progress" is such a pernicious obstacle that Ven. Mahasi > Sayadaw has been accused of having "extreme miccha ditthi" by one > very knowledgeable dsg'er, presumably because of the Venerable's well- > known penchant for talking so much about "progress in insight"! > The "extreme miccha ditthi" comment may be a little extreme, but if > one takes too lightly the descriptions of "progress" in insight given > in Vism. XXI and XXII, it is indeed a harmful form of miccha ditthi. > > When people first hear about Buddhism (especially Westerners), there > is a big tendency to think in terms of progress. So they hear about > the "stages" of "progress", read about them, and imagine themselves > to have attained high levels of insight when their experiences match > the descriptions of perceptions that may arise at the time deep > insights, strong insights arise. Phenomena arising in meditation are > not a reliable measure of understanding; understanding is better > measured in terms of evidence of arising of taints and fetters in > everyday living, e.g. the taint of finding the meditation experiences > intrinsically interesting (attachment). As progress advances, there > is less and less desire to measure progress. > > > 5862 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Jun 28, 2001 10:05pm Subject: Fwd: Hello from new member --- "Lewis, Darryl D SEPCO" > Subject: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup > Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 18:18:35 -0500 > > Dear Sarah and Jonothan, > > Thanks for the welcome. I started to investigate the > The Dhamma in the > 1970's. I looked at most traditions (mainly Tibetan > for a few years) and > eventually I was 'drawn' to Theravaden/Vipassana, I > have been a (regular) > meditator since 1988. I have some questions > regarding the suttas and > sutta study and this site seems a good place to ask > them. > > I am working in the USA but my home is in > Nottingham, England. > > With Metta > > Darryl > > Darryl Lewis > PDMS Development > > Shell International Exploration and Production > Room 1321 > > One Shell Square > New Orelans, LA70139-6001 5863 From: Herman Date: Fri Jun 29, 2001 9:01am Subject: Re: "Progress in insight" Hi all, When you agree with a post , do you say so? In my family we used to debate vehemently (non-aggressively) any topic at all, and it was a lot of fun. Agreement was noted by the silence it produced. I feel a bit silly sending a post in reply to something I am in agreement with. The notion of progress is intrinsically tied to the notion of goal. Buddhist practise tends to be goal-oriented activity. The goal is differently thought of. It may be : To not be reborn again after death, to end suffering, to realise the Buddha nature. The aspiration for the goal comes about through the awareness of reality as it is clouded by desire, aversion and ignorance, the unsatisfactory nature of all phenomena. This realisation of course does not mean that the goal is actually there to be achieved, but it becomes a mental object of desire by virtue of the aversion to our suffering. The goal is thus created in the same place, and by the same process that creates the suffering we are attempting to avoid. Therefore the goal also is suffering, although at a subtler level. Striving for the goal is therefore seriously counterproductive, it is like fighting for peace. Measuring your progress towards the achievement of this , what turns out to be an undesirable, goal, is somewhere between funny and insane. With Metta Herman --- Dan wrote: > Without the understanding of what is and what is not path being > firmly established, perceptions or experiences arising in meditation > are not indicators of deep insights, even when the perception matches > that of the descriptions of the vipassana-ñana found in Vism. XXI and > XXII (and elsewhere, such as Mahasi's "Progress in Insight"). > > > When insight is met with a reaction along the lines of "'This > [insight] has arisen. But it is impermanent, formed, ..." [Vism. XX > 126], the wisdom is maturing. Unfortunately, the difference between > this kind of reaction and the reaction "insight has arisen in me" may > not be easy to recognize. The problem is that thinking that mimics > the wise reaction can arise very soon after the original reaction > based on ditthi has already arisen. In that case, the insight was > corrupt, but the mind did not recognize the corruption; the meditator > can be convinced of great progress in insight because of some > particular perceptions that arose in the course of meditation. > Because the thoughts can arise so quickly, it is not easy to discern > whether the reaction was rooted in ditthi, mana, or tanha, or whether > it was rooted in wisdom. Until this discernment is solid, the insight > remains tender. > > These differences between reactions based on ditthi or panna are > subtle and not easy to note at the time or even at a later time in > reviewing. However, if the insight is tender, the unwise reaction is > evident in later actions and thoughts and speech. For example, from > time to time on the DSG list, there is discussion of how setting > goals for practice or progress, or even being interested in progress > at all is not only a sign of miccha ditthi, but is a major obstacle > to the arising of insight. When tender insight arises (i.e. insight > followed by a reaction rooted in tanha, ditthi, or mana), there is a > tendency to think: "I have attained this. I aim to attain that"--- all > rooted in false view! Also, when the insight is tender (or absent, in > the case of some "interesting" perceptions that might arise), the > differences between insight, samadhi, perception, and attachment are > not clearly distinguished. There is a tendency to think: "If I do > such and such, then insight will arise," or "Satipatthana is attained > by sitting in a corner and quietly directing the attention to x, y, > or z." These thoughts are silabbataparamasa (believing in the > efficacy of a particular activity) and closely related to > sakayaditthi---the idea that "I" can do this or that to cause wisdom > to arise. > > After tender insight knowledge has arisen, other insights (resembling > bhanga-ñana, baya-nana, etc. [Vism. XXI]) can arise too, but each of > these insights remains tender, fleeting, and weak, even when they > have a flash-like appearance and seemingly great depth. When these > phenomena (as described in Vism.) are met with attachment, they > really are not bhanga-ñana, baya-nana, etc. even though there is > superficial resemblance to Vism. XXI. > > When strongly developed, there is no thinking "I have this insight" > or thinking "I am at this stage of progress." In fact, this thinking > about "progress" is such a pernicious obstacle that Ven. Mahasi > Sayadaw has been accused of having "extreme miccha ditthi" by one > very knowledgeable dsg'er, presumably because of the Venerable's well- > known penchant for talking so much about "progress in insight"! > The "extreme miccha ditthi" comment may be a little extreme, but if > one takes too lightly the descriptions of "progress" in insight given > in Vism. XXI and XXII, it is indeed a harmful form of miccha ditthi. > > When people first hear about Buddhism (especially Westerners), there > is a big tendency to think in terms of progress. So they hear about > the "stages" of "progress", read about them, and imagine themselves > to have attained high levels of insight when their experiences match > the descriptions of perceptions that may arise at the time deep > insights, strong insights arise. Phenomena arising in meditation are > not a reliable measure of understanding; understanding is better > measured in terms of evidence of arising of taints and fetters in > everyday living, e.g. the taint of finding the meditation experiences > intrinsically interesting (attachment). As progress advances, there > is less and less desire to measure progress. 5864 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Fri Jun 29, 2001 11:31am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Gayan)Re: Summary of drugs, samatha, and vipassa na & Progress to Insights Dear Gayan, I think no one will be able to replace Dan during his vacation. Nonetheless his absence is going to leave a big gap - and we have missed your great inputs. robert --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > Dear all, > > I hav been lurking thru this magnificient thread about drugs > and > hallux. > (I may have misinterpreted what you were discussing, if so my > apologies..) > Personally I think that if there was at least some amount of > help from these > substances for the 'path', buddha would have mentioned that, > in compassion > for the ones who will benefit by it. > Being buddha, knowing all possibilities, he would have given > the discourses > about how to prepare and use them, . > Eventhough some may suggest that it was impossible to produce > these fine > substances during those long gone days with primitive > technology, I > personally think that area of medicine was quite advanced at > that time. > > "Buddha's dhamma (and the lobha) is indeed subtle, > hard-to-see, and most > confounding to the run-of-the-mill, averaged men, far from > Ariyans, > obstructed by the lobha, conceits, and wrong views accumulated > for the > countless time. Such wisdom is rare and precious indeed." > Sharp as a knife Kom! > > Regards > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Kom Tukovinit > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 10:40 AM > > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Summary of drugs, samatha, and > vipassana > & Progress to Insights > > > Dear Dan, > > Thanks for the well-thought-out (and researched) summary. I > have no > idea whether it is possible to have insights in a drug-induced > state, but I > thought of the possible parallel situations between the > drug-induced > states and the meditation-induced states, and reflected on the > > attachments I had during such a meditation session. > > Buddha's dhamma (and the lobha) is indeed subtle, hard-to-see, > and most > confounding to the run-of-the-mill, averaged men, far from > Ariyans, > obstructed by the lobha, conceits, and wrong views accumulated > for the > countless time. Such wisdom is rare and precious indeed. > > Anumodhana, > > kom > > --- Dan wrote: > > Before I go, just a few quick notes I've been working on > lately. 5865 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Fri Jun 29, 2001 11:58am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Gayan)Re: Summary of drugs, samatha, and v ipassa na & Progress to Insights Dear robert, I have been always here,, howering as a ghost. The thing is that I found out that I ran out of things that I can submit. But here, there are always things that I can take in. Sir Mike has been very silent, dont u think so? pleasure knowing you, regards -----Original Message----- From: Robert Kirkpatrick [mailto:robert] Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 9:32 AM Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Gayan)Re: Summary of drugs, samatha, and vipassa na & Progress to Insights Dear Gayan, I think no one will be able to replace Dan during his vacation. Nonetheless his absence is going to leave a big gap - and we have missed your great inputs. robert --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > Dear all, > > I hav been lurking thru this magnificient thread about drugs > and > hallux. > (I may have misinterpreted what you were discussing, if so my > apologies..) > Personally I think that if there was at least some amount of > help from these > substances for the 'path', buddha would have mentioned that, > in compassion > for the ones who will benefit by it. > Being buddha, knowing all possibilities, he would have given > the discourses > about how to prepare and use them, . > Eventhough some may suggest that it was impossible to produce > these fine > substances during those long gone days with primitive > technology, I > personally think that area of medicine was quite advanced at > that time. > > "Buddha's dhamma (and the lobha) is indeed subtle, > hard-to-see, and most > confounding to the run-of-the-mill, averaged men, far from > Ariyans, > obstructed by the lobha, conceits, and wrong views accumulated > for the > countless time. Such wisdom is rare and precious indeed." > Sharp as a knife Kom! > > Regards > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Kom Tukovinit > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 10:40 AM > > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Summary of drugs, samatha, and > vipassana > & Progress to Insights > > > Dear Dan, > > Thanks for the well-thought-out (and researched) summary. I > have no > idea whether it is possible to have insights in a drug-induced > state, but I > thought of the possible parallel situations between the > drug-induced > states and the meditation-induced states, and reflected on the > > attachments I had during such a meditation session. > > Buddha's dhamma (and the lobha) is indeed subtle, hard-to-see, > and most > confounding to the run-of-the-mill, averaged men, far from > Ariyans, > obstructed by the lobha, conceits, and wrong views accumulated > for the > countless time. Such wisdom is rare and precious indeed. > > Anumodhana, > > kom > 5866 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jun 29, 2001 9:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Thanks Dan I rejoice in the kusala of your recent posts, and am grateful for the appreciation expressed in this message. Of course, there is nothing deliberate about our 'pedagogy'. In my case at least it simply reflects what I have found helpful for myself in the past, particularly when you say-- > It is important to emphasize what is path and what > is not path from the beginning [sammaditthi], even if some find it > discouraging because they would rather cling to a practice. ... Of course, nothing said here is intended to be discouraging, or to sound as though it is *the* word on anything (despite impressions that might be created to the contrary), but simply to share understanding of the teachings as we find them. Dan, I am sure you will continue to follow the discussion. If I take up any points from your recent posts, I will try to do so in a general manner so that you need not feel compelled to respond. Jon --- Dan wrote: > To Jon, Sarah, and Robert > > After the discussions over the past few weeks, I have to praise your > pedagogy. I used to fault it because I knew there were so many > meditators on the dsg that kept remarking about how discouraging it > all sounded. You all seemed to discourage meditators, and I think you > do indeed discourage some meditators and turn them away. Despite > knowing that your words were right, I thought the pedagogy was > wrong: "Why discourage meditation (in the sense of formal practice)? > People are bound to understand sakayaditthi and silabbataparamasa as > they work. For crying out loud, encourage the work!" And I encouraged > it and battled you all back and forth over it for 8 months or so. > > I kept telling my wife about how you were right on doctrine but wrong > on pedagogy. I'm now coming to grip with just how big of an issue > the "imperfections" are, how closely tied to the fetters they are, > and how a samatha practice (or drug) can so easily make this obstacle > to basic understanding even more pronounced (or as Jon wrote: "[If] > we `practice' samatha with a view to having stronger satipatthana, I > fear the result could be more akusala than kusala."). Kudos. I'll now > tell my wife that I was wrong: You guys are right on doctrine and > right on pedagogy. It is important to emphasize what is path and what > is not path from the beginning [sammaditthi], even if some find it > discouraging because they would rather cling to a practice. Thanks > for your work to make this clear to so many people. You are true > knights of Dhamma. > > Dan 5867 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jun 29, 2001 10:21pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Summary of drugs, samatha, and vipassana Dear Friends This is not particularly in reply to Dan's note below, but are some thoughts on the same subject generally. If we find ourselves thinking in terms of a particular activity or practice as having a role in satipatthana, it should cause us to question our approach. Whether that role is one of enabling or simply supporting satipatthana, it may well indicate an underlying belief that there is some moment better than the present one for the studying of realities. This applies equally to an activity or practice that we think of as being kusala as to one that is otherwise. Likewise if we have the idea that there are better conditions for satipatthana if realities are appearing more 'sharply'. This I think tends to confuse the goal with the starting point. Awareness that is weak and undeveloped, by defintion, cannot experience realities wiht the same clarity and sharpness as awareness that is more developed, so we should accept this as how it will be. It may help to ask ourselves whether our 'practice' is really based on the teachings, or whether we are instead trying to fit the teachings as we now understand them to our 'practice'. Jon --- Dan wrote: > Before I go, just a few quick notes I've been working on lately. > > 1. Really, the use of hallucinogens to directly condition insight is > not fundamentally different from the use of formal meditation to > directly condition insight. The difference is that with the > hallucinogens, the perceptions are stronger and less disciplined than > they are with the conventional formal sitting, which, among many > other consequences, makes it even MORE difficult to get over > the "imperfections" of insight, the attachments to insights that do > arise, the attachments to any fruits of concentration that do arise. > > Samatha and/or drugs do not help cause insight to arise, or to make > it easier for it to arise. However, samatha and/or drugs can make > some kinds of insight appear "sharper" or "stronger" when other > conditions have resulted in the arising of a moment of insight. This > can make the arising of insight a dangerous trap, as explained below. > What an unfortunate turn of events! > > As Jon wrote: "If we have the idea of a direct and immediate > connection between [samatha and satipatthana], and we `practice' > samatha with a view to having stronger satipatthana, I fear the > result could be more akusala than kusala." How so? I don't know > exactly what Jon was thinking, but here's an idea. Let's just suppose > that moments of insight do arise, and the experience seems to match > the descriptions in Vism. XX and XXI (e.g. "As he is estimating and > judging material and immaterial states perhaps knowledge that is > unerring, keen, incisive, and very sharp arises in him, like a > lightening flash"[Vism. XX 114] or "...the meditator thinks, 'Such > illumination never arose in me before. I have surely reached the > path, reached fruition'"[Vism. XX 107]). When moments of insight > arise during the course of 'formal sitting' or on a drug trip---mind > calm, even perhaps at the level of access concentration---the insight > may arise as brilliant flashes, where some aspect of the Dhamma > appears crystal clear, strikingly clear for a few jolting moments. > The clarity of these moments is no doubt enhanced by the "formal" > setting or the drug effects. What happens in the next moments is > telling, though, and is what separates corruptions from cleaner > insight [Vism. XX.124]: Does attachment to these moments of insight > arise as "[Insight] has arisen in me", or "How agreeable this > [insight] that has arisen is" [Vism. XX.125]? Or does understanding > arise: "This [insight] has arisen. But it is impermanent..." [Vism. > XX.126]. When the impingement of an insight is more jolting, is the > reaction more likely to be rooted in attachment? Of course, it > depends on the accumulations and the conditions at the moment. But > corrupt insight---i.e., insight in one moment, strong attachment > following---seems to be such a pervasive and persistent problem for > Western lay meditators (in addition to the pervasive and persistent > problem of confusing fruits of concentration with fruits of insight)! > I have a theory: If samatha-charged or drug- charged mundane insights > arise without no clear vision about what-is-and-what-is-not-the-path, > the result is attachment to the insight and a reinforcing of > sakayaditthi ("Insight has arisen in me!"). Also, because the > meditator (wrongly) associates the insight with the practice of > samatha or to the drug's effects, there is a reinforcing of > silabbataparamasa ("This practice led to this insight"). > > The problem is that in an undeveloped mind, little flashes of insight > are met with attachment or incorrectly interpreted. The reaction to > the flashes is not something that can be controlled at the moment. It > happens too quickly. These "imperfections of insight" [Vism. XX.105- > 124] are incredibly alluring and terribly difficult to overcome. The > actual moments of insight are kusala, but the reaction to them is > typically akusala until the knowledge of what is and what is not the > Path is firmly established. > > One sign that "tender insight knowledge" [Vism. XX.104] is maturing > is when the reaction to the states is based on the "...discovery that > states have no curiosity..." [Vism. XX 105], i.e. the states > themselves lose their allure. There is no interest in the particular > meditation experiences because they are mere perceptions, not > intrinsically different from other perceptions. As long as the > experiences hold some allure and curiosity for the meditator, clear > understanding of what is and what is not the Path has not matured. > One danger of using samatha or drugs as a tool for developing > insight, is that the experiences tend to be oh-so-much-more- > interesting than everyday realities, so what would be a rare and > precious insight (viz. the "discovery that the states have no > curiosity") becomes much more difficultly attained. This is > ESPECIALLY true with drugs, because the perceptions are even stronger > than with regular meditation and the discipline required for these > perceptions to arise is weaker. Everyday realities are certainly not > as spectacular, but is the point to experience spectacular sensations > or to understand the individual essences of states [Vism. XIV.7]? If > the former, then drugs are the way to go. If the latter, then > spectacular perceptions is an impediment because such perceptions are > so easy to form attachment to [lobha---hmmm...one of the hindrances; > isn't samatha or the drug supposed to suppress these?! Yes, but what > happens the next moment? Insight or attachment?]. > > Dan 5868 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jun 29, 2001 10:34pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Digest Number 429 Betty Sorry to hear about your computer problems, but glad to hear that things are back up running again. Thanks for offering to follwo through on this. Anything you manage to find out will be appreciated. Jon --- "Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala" wrote: > Dear Jonathan, > My computer was not functioning for several weeks, but now am finally > back > on line and trying to catch up with almost a month worth of digests. > Please > forgive the extremely late reply in answer to your question concerning > Tipitika references for panna, its arising and subsequently, a deeper > understanding of the self concept and its gradual reduction. > > Unfortunately, I am not familiar enough with the scriptures to know > where to > find references to this question. My comments below come exclusively > from > Achaan's teaching (which is that of Lord Buddha and thus from the > Tipitika) > and from my own experience. However, you have whetted my appetite > (viriya, > but maybe some lobha) to look and try to find the references in the > scriptures in support, and in the process I may be able to learn a > little > more, too. Many thanks and anomodhana to you. > > With metta, > Betty > __________________________ > > Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 02:41:29 -0000 > > From: Jon > > Subject: Re: understanding the "self" concept > > > > Betty and Howard > > > > Betty, I thought your post put the position very well. As I > > understand it, panna is the very antithesis of moha and wrong view, > > and so needs no supplementary conceptualising to do its job. > > > > Of course, becoming aware (in the conventional sense) of the many > > guises and forms that the misconception of self can take is no bad > > thing and can only be a supporting condition in the long run for the > > exposure of that view to the light of understanding. Howard, I think > > this is your point and I am in full agreement on it. > > > > Betty, do you know of any sutta or commentary references that bear on > > this general question? > > > > Jon > > > > --- "Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala" > > wrote: > > > Dear Howard, > > > I have enjoyed reading your many posts and wish to address the > > question of > > > whether it is necessary to understand to any degree the exact > > nature of the > > > "self" concept before one can experience satipatthana. Though I > > have only > > > been studying with Acharn Sujin only a short time and am not well > > versed in > > > the Tipitika, I have come to realize that when panna does indeed > > arise, > > > there is not only a gradual "letting go" of the "self" concept, but > > there is > > > also a deeper and increasing realization of that which we had > > been "taking" > > > for self all along and of the various ways it is so deeply > > entrenched. > > > Therefore, when panna arises it also gives us an increased > > understanding of > > > the nature and extent of the "self" concept. So, just by being > > aware of the > > > realities as they arise, from moment to moment, as Acharn teaches, > > is > > > enough, and when the conditions are right, panna will rise and > > allow further > > > understanding of the nature of "self" and the gradual eroding of > > the concept > > > will occur. > > > > > > With metta, > > > Betty 5869 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Fri Jun 29, 2001 10:46pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: Hello from new member Dear Darryl, A quick welcome to the dsg list proper...Thanks for your intro..sounds like an interesting background. Look forward to your questions on Suttas....I'm sure there are many people hear who'd like to discuss any points on them further...we'll also enjoy your input. I'm also frm England but have lived in Australia and mostly in Hong Kong for the last 20...but looking forward to catching up in England next week briefly. Start firing those questions anytime.. Sarah "Lewis, Darryl D SEPCO" > wrote: > > > > Thanks for the welcome. I started to investigate the > > The Dhamma in the > > 1970's. I looked at most traditions (mainly Tibetan > > for a few years) and > > eventually I was 'drawn' to Theravaden/Vipassana, I > > have been a (regular) > > meditator since 1988. I have some questions > > regarding the suttas and > > sutta study and this site seems a good place to ask > > them. > > > > I am working in the USA but my home is in > > Nottingham, England. > > 5870 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jun 29, 2001 10:49pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Joe Good to hear from you again. You are right to wonder about Tipitaka references. In my view, we are not in the realm of precepts/sila here, but in the realm of right or wrong view. That is, what is the development of the path as taught by the Buddha? Just because certain substances give experiences that (subjectively) appear to match descriptions found in the texts this does nothing to indicate that this is an alternative or supplementary form of practice. As I have said elsewhere, the same could be said of any activity or practice. Sure, there are lots of techniques that when practised can be interpreted as bringing signs of progress on the path, but if the practice is not correct from the beginning the result will not be the development of the path taught by the Buddha. apparent progress will not be Jon --- Joe wrote: > >Without question hallucinogens > > are "intoxicants." > > A lot of folks out there would differ with that presumption. > > To understand what the Tipitaka context for 'intoxicants' really > means could take us on a very long discussion revolving around Pali > etymology. I wouldn't argue for the use of such substances, but I > think both sides of this argument, in this forum, may be deviating > from classic interpretations of Tipitaka. But I don't know that -- > it's why I'm asking for Tipitaka expertise. Better yet Tipitka couple > with Pali expertise. Otherwise, it's just idle speculation, no? > 5871 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Fri Jun 29, 2001 10:49pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: [DhammaStudyGroup: Contact Dear Nina and Erik, --- Erik wrote: > > Dearest Nina, > > I've been meaning to do this for some time now, but I just wanted to > thank you profusely for taking the time to write and > share "Abhidhamma in Daily Life." It changed my life. > mine too..... Sarah 5872 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Fri Jun 29, 2001 10:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Respectful Appreciative Gesture Re: A Short Note To Jonothan Abbott Dear Suan, A warm welcome from me too...i'm also looking forward to your contributions. May I ask where you live and where you've been studying the Tipitaka? --- Suan Lu Zaw wrote: > > There is not much to say about myself, I am afraid. However, > you could visit my website to have a glance at what I have > been doing. URL: http://www.bodhiology.org/ I'm looking forward to this on my return to Hong Kong without the music and beer smells here... > > I have been trying to turn the Buddhist Studies from an Arts > subject into a scientific discipline. A very ambitious pursuit! > A tall order! interesting..I wonder what your purpose is in this...is it purely academic? Best wishes anyway, Sarah 5873 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Fri Jun 29, 2001 11:01pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Thanks Dear Dan, Thanks for your very well-thought out and in-depth posts recently...there's plenty for us all to reflect on and I'm very grateful for all your contributions and especially the more recent ones. I certainly have plenty to learn about both the message and the conveying of it, but appreciate your kind words. --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dan. Don't be a stranger, eh? And regards to the > wife. Mike's right as usual. Perhaps you can not only give our regards to your wife (who must be pretty familiar with us all by now) but encourage her to look in and join us! Speak soon.... Sarah 5874 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Fri Jun 29, 2001 11:05pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Respectful Appreciative Gesture Re: Payin g Respect --- Suan Lu Zaw wrote: > Suan, p.s. > I sometimes thought what I would have looked like > if the Buddha's teachings had not tamed me. > > I believe I would surely have become a great savage if > I did not have a chance to learn and practise the mental > cultivation methods taught by the Buddha. > > The Buddha has saved me from becoming a savage. Whenever I remeber > this and whenever I enjoy the benefits of Buddhist mental > cultivation practices, I pay respect to the Buddha with deep emotion > and deep appreciation. > I liked this. ;-))..yes, it's hard for me to imagine what kind of savage I'd have become too without the B's Teachings.... Sarah 5875 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Fri Jun 29, 2001 11:11pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup]Rebirth- Captain Akusala Dear Herman and Mike, Herman, I've appreciate your honest and sincere comments....'the threat of hell' was never an incentive for me to accept a belief either!! Mike, I really like your response below and quotes..all of which I fully agreed with... (all yr recent posts have been very helpful with very timely references, thanks) sarah --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Herman, > > I find your persistent resistance to religious blind > faith most admirable. > > --- Herman wrote: > > > I hope you wil accept from me that I am a student of > > reality, not a > > practising Buddhist. > > I do accept that, and appreciate the difference. I > seldom call my self 'a Buddhist' either, because that > means so many things to so many different people and > it can lead to a lot of misunderstanding. To me the > Buddhdhamma contains the most convincing explanation > of reality, so I accept it as a working > hypothesis--but not without confidence resulting from > continual personal investigation. In this sense a > practising Buddhist is, in my considered opinion, the > foremost student of reality. > > > The Buddha is attributed with statements along the > > lines of :Take > > nothing on blind faith, but test everything. > > Right, and not just test everything--I think you might > be referring the Kalama Sutta?: > > "Of course you are uncertain, Kalamas. Of course you > are in doubt. When there are reasons for doubt, > uncertainty is born. So in this case, Kalamas, don't > go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by > scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by > analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by > probability, or by the thought, 'This contemplative is > our teacher.' When you know for yourselves that, > 'These qualities are unskillful; these qualities are > blameworthy; these qualities are criticized by the > wise; these qualities, when undertaken & carried out, > lead to harm & to suffering' -- then you should > abandon them. > > "Now, Kalamas, don't go by reports, by legends, by > traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by > inference, by analogies, by agreement through > pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, > 'This contemplative is our teacher.' When you know for > yourselves that, 'These qualities are skillful; these > qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised > by the wise; these qualities, when undertaken & > carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness' -- then > you should enter & remain in them." > > Anguttara Nikaya III.65 > Kalama Sutta > To the Kalamas > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an03-065.html > > > There is lust no realisation here that after the > > death of this body, > > some mental accumulations will settle in some other > > body. > > This is only one aspect of kamma and rebirth. I have > no personal knowledge of this either, and don't accept > it as a matter of blind faith. What I do know as a > matter of personal experience is that ignorance, > aversion and desire (to speak very generally) DO die > and ARE reborn constantly, that 'self' is an > ever-changing concept arising from these impermanent > phenomena (somewhat in the way that a moving image > arises out of the scanning electron beam on the > surface of a television screen), and that the actions > (kamma) of the present moment will have an effect on > the arisings of those various phenomena which will > arise in the future. All of these things I've > investigated over and over again and have never found > any reason to doubt them. As I understand it, the > Buddha said that all of the Dhamma is like this: > > Sandi.t.thiko akaaliko ehipassiko: > to be seen here & now, timeless, encouraging everyone > to come and see > > Opanayiko paccatta"m veditabbo viññuuhi: > leading onward, to be seen by the wise for themselves > > Since I can't remember whether or not 'I've' had any > past lives outside 'this body' (both just concepts > andyway), I don't feel at all compelled to form an > opinion on the subject. When the time comes maybe > I'll be able to know this from experience. Until then > I intend to focus on what I am able to experience and > understand. > > > I guess if > > it really is the case, and there is an open mind, > > the realisation wil > > hit. But until then..... > > Just the way I see it. > > > The threat of hell may be an incentive to accept a > > belief , in some > > quarters, but not here. Quite the opposite in fact. > > > > There is infinite wisdom in the general teachings of > > the Buddha, but > > if I am asked to bow before an infallible pope, > > casting all else > > aside, I tend to think that I am dealing with a > > social institution > > rather than a liberating insight, an institution > > hell bent on ideas > > of self and self-perpetuation. > > I would never ask you to bow before anyone, though > personally I quite enjoy bowing to venerable monks, > for example. But that's another subject. > > The social institution of 'Buddhism' is of little > interest to me (except for the Bhikku-sangha). But if > there's anything on earth which ISN'T hell-bent on > ideas of self and self-perpetuation, it's the > Buddhadhamma. > > > Sorry if this offends. > > Not at all! As I've said before, I really do find > your candor and your reslolute resistance to dogma to > be entirely admirable. > > Best Wishes, Herman, > > mike > > 5876 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Fri Jun 29, 2001 11:23pm Subject: Out of time Dear Erik, I always plan to write to you...but it always needs a little longer than I have... present moment, present reality is conditioned already...however pleasant, unpleasant or boring it may seem..if we have any idea of another reality and another time, it shows a lack of confidence in the power of satipatthana to be aware right now....Will talk more later. Dear Howard, You raised good points and ones to discuss further about samutti sacca (conventional truths) and paramattha sacca (absolute truths)..the more understanding there is of the latter, the less ignorance there is about the former I think...hope to discuss later, but off on a BIG 6 day hike tomorrow..so will be out of touch for a while I expect.. Best wishes to you both and thanks for your fascinating posts and comments as usual. Sarah 5877 From: Howard Date: Fri Jun 29, 2001 8:32pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Summary of drugs, samatha, and vipassana Hi, Jon - In a message dated 6/29/01 10:27:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > Dear Friends > > This is not particularly in reply to Dan's note below, but are some > thoughts on the same subject generally. > > If we find ourselves thinking in terms of a particular activity or > practice as having a role in satipatthana, it should cause us to question > our approach. Whether that role is one of enabling or simply supporting > satipatthana, it may well indicate an underlying belief that there is some > moment better than the present one for the studying of realities. > > This applies equally to an activity or practice that we think of as being > kusala as to one that is otherwise. > > Likewise if we have the idea that there are better conditions for > satipatthana if realities are appearing more 'sharply'. This I think > tends to confuse the goal with the starting point. Awareness that is weak > and undeveloped, by defintion, cannot experience realities wiht the same > clarity and sharpness as awareness that is more developed, so we should > accept this as how it will be. > > It may help to ask ourselves whether our 'practice' is really based on the > teachings, or whether we are instead trying to fit the teachings as we now > understand them to our 'practice'. > > Jon > ============================= I like this very much! In part, what you write addresses the problem of confusing means and ends, and forgetting that we always start where we are, not where we would *like* to be. Thanks for your succinct and helpful post. 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) 5878 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Sat Jun 30, 2001 0:41am Subject: Introductory Suan Lu Zaw Re: A Short Answer To Sarah Procter Abbott Dear Sarah How are you? Thank you for your kind welcome. I live in Canberra, in Australia. My full address can be found on my website. URL: http://www.bodhiology.org/ I studied Pali the old way in Myanmar and in Australia. To find out what it is like studying Pali the old way, please go to "The Science And Academic Journal Of Bodhiology" on my website. You will see the content page. Please click "Other Categories". You will see the introductory page for my partial translation of a Pali Grammar, "Rupasiddhi". Well, when you read Pali, you also read Tipitaka. I was also lucky enough to be allowed to attend an Honours Pali class at the Australian National University, way way back in 1984. The Department of Buddhist Studies at the ANU, abolished during early 90s, placed more emphasis on Sanskrit studies. I needed to do two more years of Sanskrit to be allowed to do PhD. But, I did not pursue for a doctorate. Instead, I pursued Pali studies and Abhidhamma studies on my own. In short, I swapped a doctorate degree for Pali Abhidhamma expertise. Some may think I blew it. But, I did not regret it. What if I had died during the 5 years while I was studying Sanskrit for 2 more years and doing PhD research for further 3 years! I wanted to get Pali Abhidhamma expertise sooner! That had been and is more important than a PhD degree. That is how I have been studying Tipitaka. Regarding my attempt to turn Buddhist studies into a science subject, you wrote "interesting..I wonder what your purpose is in this...is it purely academic?" Far from it, Sarah. One aspect of the scientific thinking is to ask if something can be implemented in real life. My scientific background has given me what I would call "the implementation mentality". The current Buddhist studies as an Arts subject at the universities are argumentative, critical, and speculative. However, Buddhist studies as a science subject would become experimental and implementational for individuals and mankind as a whole. You can read on these matters in detail in "The Science And Academic Journal Of Bodhiology" on my website. Please click on "The Goal Of the Journal", and "The Science Articles". I hope you now know me a little bit better! And thank you for your interest in my intellectual gambling. With regards Suan Lu Zaw --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > Dear Suan, > > A warm welcome from me too...i'm also looking forward to your contributions. > > May I ask where you live and where you've been studying the Tipitaka? > > --- Suan wrote: > > > There is not much to say about myself, I am afraid. However, > > you could visit my website to have a glance at what I have > > been doing. URL: http://www.bodhiology.org/ > > I'm looking forward to this on my return to Hong Kong without the music and > beer smells here... > > > > I have been trying to turn the Buddhist Studies from an Arts > > subject into a scientific discipline. A very ambitious pursuit! > > A tall order! > > interesting..I wonder what your purpose is in this...is it purely academic? > > Best wishes anyway, > > Sarah 5879 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jun 30, 2001 1:22am Subject: tender insight Dan has explained very well according to the Visuddhimagga the imperfections of insight, all the dangers. And also anumodana to his wife. The word tender insight was used many times and since not everybody here may understand what it is I would like to quote from Acharn's Survey, the Development of Insight, Ch 2, the stages of vipassana. I myself do not know much about tender insight, taruna vipassana.