6200 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 3:09am Subject: The meaning of Equanimity Equanimity is a very important part of Buddhist practise. It means not having any aversion or fondness of something, or indulging in indifference for that matter. It means neither indulging in, or rejecting what you are experiencing, not giving in to like and dislike. Thus it is the perfect countermeasure for attachments of all kinds, as it ends the volitional cycle. But many people mistakenly believe that being equanimous means that you are supposed to be unaffected by your external surroundings. Thus they reject their own reactionary thoughts towards the external surroundings in order to be unaffected by it, and thus the very thing that the equanimity is supposed to counter, namely the habitual tendency towards indulgence and rejection, is actually sustained and nourished! Such people become numb automatons with no wisdom. They are essentially "wall-builders." They erect solid walls to isolate their mind-environment from the external environment, and mistake this for attainment. Yet they will never know their own minds. This is also a danger to watch out for in meditation! True equanimity means to be equanimous in the face of your own defilements, to not be dragged around by your likes and dislikes, but rather be equanimously aware of those defilements, without rejecting or indulging in those defilements, but on the other hand, if you do find yourself indulging in or rejecting your defilements, then that very indulgence/rejection is also something to be equanimous towards (since this is also part of the mind-environment), rather than rejecting it, and then be aware of the defilement that you were indulging or rejecting. To cultivate Panna means to know your own mind. To know your own mind, you have to cease being dragged around by the mind. The way to cease being dragged around by the mind, is by not sustaining the habits of the mind, being indulging in or rejecting the objects of the mind. Thus, through equanimity, not only is Panna nurtured, but defilements are also ended, as they are no longer sustained. Regards, Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6201 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 3:14am Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 8:54 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! > Hi Anders, > > May I join in the discussion? Sure! > I know that I was born with ignorance and defilements. I don't > need to know where they came from. Your question about the origin of > our ignorance sounds very much like the story of the person shot by > an arrow. His care provider needed to take the arrow out and > attended the wound before trying to investigate the incident. I think you misunderstood my question. My question was not wherefrom, or how Ignorance arose. I don't know anything about that, and the Buddha himself said that contemplating the unimaginable beginnings of Samsara is a cause for insanity if taken to its end-conclusion. My question was, where did ignorance arise once it had arisen? Regards Anders > > The Buddha taught that the first link from which the entire > Samsaric circle > > arises from is ignorance. My question is simple: Where did > ignorance arise? 6202 From: Joe Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 4:05am Subject: Re: (Vakkali-Ray) Very good. Can you translate the phrases? Meanwhile I work on it myself. Thanks very much. Joe --- "Jim Anderson" wrote: > Dear Joe, > > >Surely anyone with even an elementary knowledge of Pali can discern > >whether the proper translation in 'unestablished consciousness' > >or 'consciousness unestablished'. Pali is very precise - almost as > >precise as Sanskrit or Latin - in the attributive. > > > >Do you happen to know the exact Pali phrase? > > appati.t.t.hitena ca bhikkhave vi~n~naa.nena Vakkali kulaputto parinibbuto > ti. (S iii 124 pts) > > For further information: > > commentary: > appati.t.t.hitenaa ti pa.tisandhivi~n~naa.nena appati.t.thitena. > appati.t.thitakaara.naa ti attho. (SA i 184 pts) > > (with the re-linking or rebirth consciousness not re-established) > > subcommentary: > appati.t.thitenaa ti patit.tha.m alabhantena. itthambhuutalakkha.ne eta.m > kara.navacana.m, anuppattidhammenaa ti attho. sati hi uppaade pati.t.thita.m > naama siyaa, a.t.thakathaaya.m pana yadeva tassa vi~n~naa.nassa > appati.t.thaanakaara.na.m, tadeva parinibbaanakaara.nan ti vutta.m > appati.t.thitakaara.naa ti. (SA.T i 218 cscd) > > Best wishes, > Jim > > 6203 From: Joe Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 4:06am Subject: Re: (Vakkali-Ray) Very interesting, thanks, Cameron. Joe --- "Derek Cameron" wrote: > --- Ray wrote: > > Do you happen to know the exact Pali phrase? > > It's "appati.t.thitena viññaa.nena" (SN XXII.87). This isn't one of > the ones translated at Access to Insight, but the Pali is online at > http://www.tipitaka.org/ Samyutta Nikaya, Khandhavagga, section 22 > (Khandhasa.myutta), number 87 (Vakkali). > > The context is that after the liberation and death of Vakkali, the > monks see a cloud of black smoke moving around. The Buddha tells the > monks that this is Mara, looking for Vakkali's consciouness. But, > says the Buddha, Vakkali attained final Nibbana "appati.t.thitena > viññaa.nena". > > appati.t.thitena = instrumental of a- (not) + appati.t.thita, which > is the past participle of pati.t.thahati, meaning "to stand fast or > firmly, to find a support in, to be established, to fix oneself, to > be set up, to stay" (PED). > > Derek. 6204 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 4:32am Subject: Re: Another lesson Learned - Robert Dear Victor, Thank you very much. The sutta is a joy to read. kom --- Victor wrote: > Hi Mike, > > If interested, you might want to refer to > Vera Sutta, Animosity > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an10-092.html > > Metta, > Victor > > 6205 From: Joe Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 5:08am Subject: Re: Another lesson Learned - Robert Welcome to DSG, David. I have come to the same conclusion as you have with regard to understanding the Tipitaka, and with regard to its common mistranslation and misuse by Buddhists in many traditions, including Theravada. Along these same lines of inquiry, have you reached any conclusions as to the weighting you give to each of the respective pitakas, by any chance? sadhu, Joe --- David wrote: > Dear Gayan > I am very sorry, but it is published translations like this and > similar, that allow skeptics to Buddhism to have a field day with us. > Firstly we must take what the Buddha has said in its totality and > than apply these teachings. We cannot take bits and pieces from a > host of translators, patch them together and take the resultant as > Buddha's Dhamma." The only way to end this historical problem is to > spend time reading the Tipitaka in full in its "Original Pali" and > not translated versions, which are infact individual opinions, quite > different insome cases from the original Author, the Buddha. This is > if you wish to delve deep into Dhamma, otherwise if you are > comfortable in just learning in general than the study of Tipitaka in > Original Pali is not necessary. For deep Dhamma understanding you > must be the translator yourself, then your translations will be > weighted by the strength in your own belief. This will be affected, > once again based on your inner likings to sections you prefer more > than others. > > My readings (and that of my Buddhist brothers) of the Tipitaka (Pali > Version) has never revealed anything to imply self-realization even > remotely. There are many variants in translations of the original > which unfortunately are dependent on the origin of the translator. > This is not new and has been a point of contention for centuries. > > Much Metta to All > David > > --- "Gayan Karunaratne" wrote: > > In sotapatti samyutta there are many discourses given by the > buddha, about > > 'self-streamentry-check'. > > where one can look into (as a mirror) and self-declare that he/she > is a > > sotapanna.(dhammadasa). > > > > Rgds 6206 From: Joe Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 5:26am Subject: Re: Stream Entry - clarification > Basically, it tells you to go from your own direct experience of the Dhamma. > If you find your own direct experience of the Dhamma inadequate to answer > such a question, then what is the point of lingering on it, since it has no > practical application for you that might help you further your own daily > practise? > I think there are many people here who might find themselves violating the > principles laid forth in this sutta, but again, this is not something that > they should accept from my words, or even the Kalama Sutta itself! This is > something they have to discover from their own personal experience. There has been a fair amount of prevarication and discussion on this forum as to what the Kalama Sutta really means. I read it basically the way you do, but given the translation problem David has so well articulated, who knows? Anders, why don't you fly to Bangkok and have an interview with DSG's mentor, Ajahn Sujin. She will give you a pretty quick assessment of your understanding of Abhidhamma, as she sees it, at the very least. Or at least she used to do that sort of thing. Not as an 'evaluation' as such, but as grist for talking about Abhidhamma. Maybe the format is different these days (but they don't call it 'brain-eating' for nothing!). Of course you have no personal need for such an encounter and neither does Ajahn Sujin. But from my (rather distant) perspective, your confidence is inspiring. And so is Ajahn Sujin's. You don't find that many people in Buddhism with this kind of confidence, aside from the evangelistic types who are raising funds, building temples or just hell bent on conversion. Of course there is no final round, as people will believe what they want to believe in the end. Carry on nonetheless. Joe 6207 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 6:36am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Stream Entry - clarification ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 11:26 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Stream Entry - clarification > There has been a fair amount of prevarication and discussion on this > forum as to what the Kalama Sutta really means. I read it basically the > way you do, but given the translation problem David has so well > articulated, who knows? Well, I've found a pretty nitty-gritty translation. The URL is: http://www.westernbuddhistreview.com/vol3/Knowledge.htm My knowledge of Pali is not big enough to tell whether the author knows what he is talking about, but perhaps others can. > Anders, why don't you fly to Bangkok and have an interview with DSG's > mentor, Ajahn Sujin. She will give you a pretty quick assessment of your > understanding of Abhidhamma, as she sees it, at the very least. Or at > least she used to do that sort of thing. Not as an 'evaluation' as such, > but as grist for talking about Abhidhamma. Maybe the format is different > these days (but they don't call it 'brain-eating' for nothing!). Haha, 'fly to Bangkok' sounds awfully simple. I don't think I'll have the money to go there until I finish my education (which should be one year from now). But I most likely will go to Bangkok after that. > Of course you have no personal need for such an encounter and neither > does Ajahn Sujin. But from my (rather distant) perspective, your > confidence is inspiring. And so is Ajahn Sujin's. You don't find that many > people in Buddhism with this kind of confidence, aside from the > evangelistic types who are raising funds, building temples or just hell > bent on conversion. Hmm, I think I've had that confidence right from the beginning really. I have never really had much doubt about the validity of the Dhamma, only my own interpretation of it. In another mail, I mentioned a friend of mine who would soon become a Theravada teacher himself. He recently said to me, that in his experience, the faith in the fact that one will be enlightened, is highly instrumental in the actualisation of that enlightenment. I can see his point. Your beliefs influence things, and if you believe that you are far away from enlightenment, far away is what you will be. > Of course there is no final round, as people will believe what they want > to believe in the end. That is true. And such is their freedom to do so. The point of this post is not really to say 'don't you think that!'. It's just to say, 'think what you will, but don't expect me to endorse any of it'. > Carry on nonetheless. Will do so. Thanks for your input :o) Kind regards Anders 6208 From: Num Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 2:44am Subject: Cetasikas : ? Sati (mindfulness) ? Hi Nina, Sarah&Jon and everybody. Sorry, Sarah & Jon, I think I mixed up the list of persons who are going to go Bangkok. I will be there July next year :). I am not dreaming, Sarah :). Thanks Nina for your reply. I am pretty busy and caught up with my work, my real vacation is coming in two weeks. A lot to do before I can take off. About sati (mindfulness), in satipatthana, sati is mindful of nama or rupa as it appears. I am not clear what does sati be mindful in dana, smatha or kusula moment which is not vipassana. I definitely did some wholesome deed before, but sati (as in sati-patthana) did not necessary occur at that moment, but sati cetasika had to be there, if it really kusala moment ? ________________________________________________ You wrote that :... Mindfulness has "not floating away" as its characteristic, unforgetfulness as its function, guarding, or the state of facing the object, as its manifestation, firm remembrance (sanna) or application in mindfulness as regards the body, etc., as proximate cause. It should be regarded as a door-past from being firmly established in the object, and as a doorkeeper from guarding the door of the senses. ________________________________________________ Sati in sati-patthana has character of non floating by being mindful of paramattha-dhamma at that moment, but sati in general kusala moment does not, is this correct? So sati in satipatthana cannot have pannatti as its arammana but sati in general sobhana citta can have pannatti as arammana, right? Let me also ask about arammana of sati (in sati patthana). Sati can arise only in kusala moment but can have kusala-, akusala-, vipaka-, kiriya-citta & cetasika or rupa as arammana. I heard from a CD by Aj.Santi which given to me by Kom that sati can be mindful of past, present and even future arammana. In case of past arammana, that arammana is not sampayutta with citta, cetasika and sati at that moment but being only arammana paccaya. Just curious, so sati can be mindful of present and past kusula moment in but only past aramana in panca-dvara. I have no idea about future arammana. Is my statement valid? I am not clear about this, Always appreciate your response. Have to run. I am really mean it, Sarah. Num 6209 From: m. nease Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 8:01am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Attachment to Right View - Spiritual arrogance Thanks Jon, I'll see if I can come up with it. mike --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Mike > > --- "m. nease" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > > > If I recall correctly, the Buddha somewhere > defined > > nibbana as complete and perfected right view. > Does > > this ring a bell with anyone? > > > > mike > > Interesting. I've had a browse around but have not > come up with anything. > Most of the synonyms for or descriptions of nibbana > are in terms that do > not relate to conditioned realities (eg, the > deathelss, cessation, void), > but given your excellent recall of suttas I am sure > the reference is there > somewhere. Please let us know if you come across it > anytime. > > Jon > > 6210 From: m. nease Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 8:09am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Another lesson Learned - Robert Thanks, Victor, For reminding of this great sutta. "When, for a disciple of the noble ones, these five forms of fear & animosity are stilled; when he is endowed with these four factors of stream entry; and when, through discernment, he has rightly seen & rightly ferreted out this noble method, then if he wants he may state about himself: 'Hell is ended; animal wombs are ended; the state of the hungry shades is ended; states of deprivation, destitution, the bad bourns are ended! I am a stream-winner, steadfast, never again destined for states of woe, headed for self-awakening!'" The context of this is a little unusal, the combination of these four factors of stream entry and the stilling of these five forms of fear and animosity, I don't off-hand recall encountering elsewhere. However, it does seem to state plainly that the stream-entrant can perceive his stream-entry. Thanks again. mike --- Victor wrote: > Hi Mike, > > If interested, you might want to refer to > Vera Sutta, Animosity > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an10-092.html > > Metta, > Victor > > > --- "m. nease" > wrote: > > Dear David, > > > > This is very interesting! I'm curious about one > > point: > > > > --- David wrote: > > > > > This level can only > > > be realized by others onto the receiver and > never by > > > the receiver > > > him/her self be realized (during life). > > > > I hadn't heard this before that I can recall. Is > it > > from the Tipitaka? > > > > Nice to hear from you again. > > > > mike 6211 From: m. nease Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 8:12am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Another lesson Learned - Robert Dear David, The subject of poor translation has come up before. It would be most helpful if you could show us some specific examples, with the Pali, where these passages in the PTS are in error. Thanks in advance, mike --- David Blickenstaff wrote: > Dear Gayan > I am very sorry, but it is published translations > like this and > similar, that allow skeptics to Buddhism to have a > field day with us. > Firstly we must take what the Buddha has said in its > totality and > than apply these teachings. We cannot take bits and > pieces from a > host of translators, patch them together and take > the resultant as > Buddha's Dhamma." The only way to end this > historical problem is to > spend time reading the Tipitaka in full in its > "Original Pali" and > not translated versions, which are infact individual > opinions, quite > different insome cases from the original Author, the > Buddha. This is > if you wish to delve deep into Dhamma, otherwise if > you are > comfortable in just learning in general than the > study of Tipitaka in > Original Pali is not necessary. For deep Dhamma > understanding you > must be the translator yourself, then your > translations will be > weighted by the strength in your own belief. This > will be affected, > once again based on your inner likings to sections > you prefer more > than others. > > My readings (and that of my Buddhist brothers) of > the Tipitaka (Pali > Version) has never revealed anything to imply > self-realization even > remotely. There are many variants in translations of > the original > which unfortunately are dependent on the origin of > the translator. > This is not new and has been a point of contention > for centuries. > > Much Metta to All > David > > --- "Gayan Karunaratne" > wrote: > > In sotapatti samyutta there are many discourses > given by the > buddha, about > > 'self-streamentry-check'. > > where one can look into (as a mirror) and > self-declare that he/she > is a > > sotapanna.(dhammadasa). > > > > Rgds 6212 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 8:41am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello Dear Anders I resend to actualize what you replied to me one week ago on this issue of enlightenment claimings. And indeed even if you don't claim to be a stream enterer, you pretty much hinted it with your introduction and in your site. Let's say you invited us to discuss the issue, you enhanced this possibility, you stung our curiousity. Now apart the various discussions on how to evaluate it in order to assess the authenticity or not of your mental evolution (what personally I don't care as the results don't impinge my own research anyway), considering that you declare not being particularly interested on the fact whether or not you are a stream enterer, why then did you chose to introduce yourself in such a provocative fashion, just to create havoc? I suppose it is pertinent enquiring about your motivations. Perhaps you have a hidden agenda and secretively you are planning to brainwash all of us to become your disciples and give you half of our salaries. ;-)))) With me you are wasting your time, I am destitute and a bit difficult to persuade however. :-)))) Regards Cybele the mother goddess ;-), well I want a title myself, at least I have got a mythological prestige even if I am not a stream enterer. > >--- "cybele chiodi" >wrote: > > > > Dear Ander > > > > After reading your website I could come to only two conclusions >that I will > > expose with my usual straightforwardness that your advanced stage >of mental > > clarity will perfectly handle equanimously: > > > > If you are not in a mystical delusional mind state of psychotic >nature it > > seems to me that you are claiming to be enlightened. > > Could you clarify the issue for us? You replied: >I always appreciate straightforwardness. Please feel free to strike >down at anything I say. I am always interested in improving my >practise. >Well, I would be somewhat hestitant to say I am enlightened (it's >stream-entry at best), as I am unsure of what your definition of it >is, as well as the definition of stream-entry. If stream-entry is >realising that are dhammas are not-self and impermanent, and thus >realising that which not impermanent, then yes, you could say it is >stream-entry. I've noticed that I no longer sustain the fetters >accosiated with stream-entry (views of self, precepts and practises. >Any others?), so that would also match. But I think I can remember >some sutta (can't remmember which one) that mentions something about >the unwholesome deeds which a stream-entrant can never commit, and >not all of them fitted me if I remember correctly (can't remember >what they were anymore). >My own teacher has certified it, if that is any help to you. > >Personally, it doesn't matter much to me whether I am a stream- >entrant or not, or even enlightened or not. I figure I'll make it all >in due time, and thinking about it certainly won't speed up the >actualisation of it. > >Hope that clarifies. > >Regards, >Anders > 6213 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 8:54am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Anders Must admit that you are smart, whether you are or not a stream enterer, what doesn't matter for me anyway. The post is inspiring, I would suggest next time less 'preaching tone', we have enough of missionary like statements and we all commit this mistake on our enthusiasm, we get carried away. Can I forward your post to another list where we are discussing on this subject, would save me to say the very same things composing another mail, what is time and energy consuming. I will keep your name obviously. Let me know if you agree. Thanks Cybele Anders wrote: >Equanimity is a very important part of Buddhist practise. It means not >having any aversion or fondness of something, or indulging in indifference >for that matter. It means neither indulging in, or rejecting what you are >experiencing, not giving in to like and dislike. Thus it is the perfect >countermeasure for attachments of all kinds, as it ends the volitional >cycle........ > > 6214 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 8:57am Subject: Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > Please try to use your own understanding, rather > than the scriptures. Besides, I don't think they'll be much help to you i= n > this regard. I promise not to quote any scriptures in this message. You probably have noticed that my knowledge of the scripture is spotty at best anyway. > > The Buddha taught that the first link from which the entire Samsaric circle > arises from is ignorance. By your response to Alex, you are not asking about the origin of ignorance. > My question is simple: Where did ignorance arise? As you are well aware of, the buddha taught that all conditioned realities = arise because there are conditions for them to arise. Ignorance (moha) is such a reality. As far as beings are concerned, only an arahat has no more conditions for moha to arise in him. Moha, a mental factor (cetasika), is said to be co-arising with other realities. In order for moha to arise, there must be the following co- arising realities: 1) consciousness (citta) 2) 3 other mental factors that arise with all akusala dhamma including shamelessness (ahiri), fearlessness (anottappa), and restlessness (uddhacca). 3) Other appropriate mental factors. In the plane of existence with 5 kandhas, a consciousness and its associated mental factors must arise on a base rupa (vathu rupa): the vathu rupa acts as a support condition (nissaya pacaya) for the consciousness and the mental factors. The consciousness and the mental factors arise and fall at/on the same vathu. For moha in particular, it arises within the heart-base (hadaya vathu). By the above explanations (in the plane with 5 kandhas), it can be deduced that moha rises within the consciousness, within other mental factors besides itself, and within the heart base. While I was writing this message, it seemed to me that you wanted to ask a different question, but I think this answer fits most with the question. > If you say nowhere, then you confirm the doctrine of annihilation, on The conditions for the moha to arise is not only its co-arising realities and its vathu, it is also other dhammas that no longer exist and dhamma that didn't co-arise with the moha. > account of that there was nothing before, and there will thus be nothing > after the ending of ignorance and Samsara. A conditioned dhamma doesn't arise unless its conditioning dhammas are fully ripened. The kandhas of an arahat, after his pari-nibbana, ceases to condition additional kandhas to arise. I think we already agree on this point (you said the kandhas disperse). If you notice this description, nothing is annihilated. There are no more conditions for additional khandas that we conventionally identify as belonging to that arahat. What do I mean when I say a person ceases to exist after his pari- nibbana? I mean his aggregates (the kandhas) cease to condition additional kandhas to arise. However, if you look at this at the paramatha level, this person never exists at the first place. What do I mean when I say this person does not exist? I mean the person is a *concept* and has no fundamental characteristics (sabhava); at any point of time, only the aggregates exist for an infinitesmally small amount of time. Nibbana is a reality, an elment, a dhatu with *distinct* characteristics from all the 28 rupas, 89 citta, and 52 cetasikas. Nibbana is not counted to be part of the aggregates that we take as a person. Nibbana does *not* cognize, but *can* be cognized. Since the only realities that cognize are citta and cetasikas, the only way to verify nibbana is that it *must* be cognizable. > If you say Nibbana, how is this > possible since Nibbana is a cognisable object? Nibbana is cognizable because it has its own fundamental (paramatha) characteristics (sabhava). > How can the cognisable ever > cognise something else? Nibbana does not cognize anything, although it can be an object of cognition. A citta can cognize another citta and cetasikas, which cognize a different = object. For example, when a citta (A) sees a visible object, the citta is = cognizing that visible object. There may be another citta (B) that rises after (A) cognizing (A). (A) and (B) cognize different objects even though (B) cognizes (A). I think there are a number of people on the list who maintain the position that an unconditioned element cannot be cognized unless the element is itself conditioned. Hence, to say that an unconditioned element can be cognized is a contradiction. Although I don't believe there is a scripture that supports this position, would anyone care to explain the logics of how we can arrive at the conclusion? kom 6215 From: Howard Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 5:25am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Hi, Alex (and Anders) - In a message dated 7/12/01 3:28:22 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Alex Tran writes: > > Hi Anders, > > May I join in the discussion? > > I know that I was born with ignorance and defilements. I don't > need to know where they came from. Your question about the origin of > our ignorance sounds very much like the story of the person shot by > an arrow. His care provider needed to take the arrow out and > attended the wound before trying to investigate the incident. > > With Metta, > Alex > > > The Buddha taught that the first link from which the entire > Samsaric circle > > arises from is ignorance. My question is simple: Where did > ignorance arise? > > ================================= I recall that there is a sutta in which the Buddha points out that avijja (ignorance) is not a "first cause", but is, itself caused. I seem to recall that the asava ("outflowings") may have been given as the cause of ignorance. I don't recall which sutta it is. 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) 6216 From: m. nease Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 9:47am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Dear Howard, I'm pretty sure you're right about this, and I've read it stressed by others (that is that paticcasamuppada is continuous, without a really originating link) and believe this is correct, but I can't put my finger on the sutta. I'll keep an eye out for it. mike --- Howard wrote: > ================================= > I recall that there is a sutta in which the > Buddha points out that > avijja (ignorance) is not a "first cause", but is, > itself caused. I seem to > recall that the asava ("outflowings") may have been > given as the cause of > ignorance. I don't recall which sutta it is. > > With metta, > Howard 6217 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 10:48am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] the end to rebirth Nina I think you are referring to the Pali passages that Jim posted. Would you like to share your translation (and understanding) with us? An interesting point. Jon --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Jim and all, > I just wish to thank Jim for his excellent post on unestablished> with commentary and subcommentary. This is really > wonderful, > quite clear and precise. Nina. > 6218 From: Derek Cameron Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 11:07am Subject: Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! --- Howard wrote: > I recall that there is a sutta in which the Buddha points out that > avijja (ignorance) is not a "first cause", but is, itself caused. I seem to > recall that the asava ("outflowings") may have been given as the cause of > ignorance. I don't recall which sutta it is. Hello, Howard, Toward the end of the Saamaññaphala Sutta (DN 2) it says that avijjaa ("ignorance") *is* one of the aasava ("outflowings"). Derek. 6219 From: Herman Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 11:52am Subject: Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Anders, I have just one or two questions in relation to your simple question. Is your question based on your own understanding only? Why do you presuppose that there is a locus for ignorance? Kind Regards Herman --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > Okay, Kom. I will let go of the subject of whether Nibbana is released > consciousness or not now. Before that, however, I would just like you to > answer one simple question. Please try to use your own understanding, rather > than the scriptures. Besides, I don't think they'll be much help to you in > this regard. > > The Buddha taught that the first link from which the entire Samsaric circle > arises from is ignorance. My question is simple: Where did ignorance arise? > > If you say nowhere, then you confirm the doctrine of annihilation, on > account of that there was nothing before, and there will thus be nothing > after the ending of ignorance and Samsara. If you say Nibbana, how is this > possible since Nibbana is a cognisable object? How can the cognisable ever > cognise something else? > > Patiently awaiting your answer... 6220 From: Howard Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 8:31am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Hi, Derek - In a message dated 7/12/01 11:10:09 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Derek writes: > Hello, Howard, > > Toward the end of the Saamaññaphala Sutta (DN 2) it says that avijjaa > ("ignorance") *is* one of the aasava ("outflowings"). > > Derek. > =========================== Yes, I see what you mean. There is mention of the "fermentation of ignorance". I still seem to recall, however, that elsewhere the Buddha refers to the out-flowings as the cause of ignorance. I have seen from time to time that such discrepancies occur in the suttas. It could be that the categories are not quite as hard and fast as we might expect. [Of course, I could be mistaken in recalling the asavas being given as cause of avijja.] 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) 6221 From: Howard Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 8:52am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Hi again, Derek - I found the following on the Access to Insight site. It is from the sutta I had in mind: Ignorance avijja The definition > "And what is ignorance, what is the origin of ignorance, what is the > cessation of ignorance, what is the way leading to the cessation of > ignorance? Not knowing about dukkha, not knowing about the origin of dukkha > , not knowing about the cessation of dukkha, not knowing about the way > leading to the cessation of dukkha -- this is called ignorance. With the > arising of the taints there is the arising of ignorance; with the cessation > of the taints there is the cessation of ignorance. The way leading to the > cessation of ignorance is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right > view...right concentration." ... "And what are the taints, what is the > origin of the taints, what is the cessation of the taints, what is the way > leading to the cessation of the taints? There are three taints: the taint > of sensual desire, the taint of being and the taint of ignorance. With the > arising of ignorance there is the arising of the taints. With the cessation > of ignorance there is the cessation of the taints. The way leading to the > cessation of the taints is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right > view...right concentration." > >> -- MN 9 > Notice that this includes: "With the arising of the taints there is the arising of ignorance; with the cessation of the taints there is the cessation of ignorance." And yet, as you point out, ignorance, itself, is given as one of the four taints. (So, it is a little confusing, unless ignorance as a taint is considered to be different in some manner from ignorance as a factor in the cycle of dependent arising.) 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) 6222 From: Victor Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 1:45pm Subject: Re: Attachment to Right View - Spiritual arrogance Is right view fit to be seen thus: "This is mine, this I am, this is my self"? --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > > --- 243082114180158116015199190036129 wrote: > > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > > > If we don't see the attachment to view - even to right view- > > > then how can we ever let it go. Some people never even > > relaise > > > that they have attachment to view. This is not a matter of > > > seeing it and trying to relinquish but learning to see it > > again > > > and again and again and again - at the very moments it > > arises. > > > By seeing its conditioned nature this is also going together > > > with satipatthana. > > > > Dear Robert and friends, > > > > When reading the above statements, I was thinking about our > > Lord > > Buddha. He continuously advocates that we need to develop > > Right > > View. It seems that the Buddha and the Arahants are living > > (or > > swimming and breathing) in Right View all of Their lives on > > this > > earth. In another word, Right View adheres to Them. > > > > Therefore, my question is why do we need to let Right View > > go then? > > > > Metta, > > Alex > > ______________ > Dear Alex, > it is not the right view that is to be discarded but the > attachment to it. > To my mormon friends attachment to their ideas, to their faith > is seen as beneficial and to be cultivated. This is not so in > the Dhamma because attachment is a distorting factor that clouds > right vision. > Some people hear this, for example the famous sutta about the > raft (do we carry it around after crossing the river), and > decide that they will just discard all view. Thye don't realise > that view can't be discarded by decision or thinking, but only > by actual clear comprehension of the dhammas that arise at the 6 > doors. By this way direct insight knows things as they are. > Then there is right view but it arises in association with > alobha (non-attachment) unlike wrong view that always comes with > lobha(attachment). > Some people imagine they have no view because they have such > ideas as "I don't say this is right, I don't say that is right" > -they don't have opinions: but this is simply another view that > is attached to. > The most deeply held views are those revolving around the idea > of self. Those that take concepts for being something real, and > realities for self or lasting. > This is quite a hard topic and otehrs may be able to put it > better. > There is an article by Bhikkhu bodhi that is worth reading on > this: > http://www.abhidhamma.org/essay25.html > robert > . > 6223 From: craig garner Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 3:28pm Subject: Dear Sangha, could anybody please give me some clues to what kind of rules a buddhist couple should follow? with refference to marriage etc... I have read a bit hear and a bit there but it seems a little confusing for me, at least maybe a few of you could point me in the right dirrection it would be much appreciated. with metta Craig. 6224 From: kelvin liew peng chuan Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 4:35pm Subject: where's it frm? Dear friends in Dhamma, This may be a very silly question, but out of curiousity, may i ask where our panca sila comes from? any sutta or gatha to refer to ? thanks.MAy you be well and happy! ~ sampuna 6225 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 4:56pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Panca-sila - where's it frm? Kelvin Not a silly question at all. One of the suttas in which the 5 precepts are referred to is the one mentioned earlier by Victor in his post- Vera Sutta, Animosity http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an10-092.html There are other more direct references than this, and I am sure others will post them. Jon --- kelvin liew peng chuan wrote: > Dear friends in Dhamma, > > This may be a very silly question, but out of curiousity, may i ask > where > our panca sila comes from? any sutta or gatha to refer to ? thanks.MAy > you > be well and happy! ~ sampuna > 6226 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 5:15pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) dear Robert E. I got around to looking up some details on alcohol. In the kuddakatapatha by Buddhaghosa (translated as Minor readings PTS by nanamoli). there is a comprehensive section ion the precepts. on p24 -25 it notes that the blamableness of an action varies according to its degree. hence killing a large animal is worse than killing an insect because of the degree of effort involved and other factors. it has many details. there is one interesting part " But unlike killing, drinking is always greatly blamable. Why? because it obstructs the ariyan Dhamma by inducing even madness in a human being". p32 "the fruits of abstaining from the opportunity for negilgence due to wine or liquor are such things as quick recognition of past, future and present tasks to be done, constant establishment of mindfulness, possession of knowledge, non-stupidty, non-drivelingness,,,non-confusion, non-timorousness, non-presumption, uneviousness, truthfulness, freedom from malicious and harsh speech and from gossip, freedom from dullness day and night, gratitude, libearlty, possesion of conscience, great understanding, rectitude of view, skill in distinguishing skill from unskill, and so on"END QUOTE. robert 6227 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 4:40pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 5:52 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! >Anders, >I have just one or two questions in relation to your simple question. >Is your question based on your own understanding only? Pretty much, yes. >Why do you presuppose that there is a locus for ignorance? 'locus'.... No mention of it in my dictionary. Would you care to define that word for me? 6228 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 4:42pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 2:54 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity > Dear Anders > > Must admit that you are smart, whether you are or not a stream enterer, what > doesn't matter for me anyway. > The post is inspiring, I would suggest next time less 'preaching tone', we > have enough of missionary like statements and we all commit this mistake on > our enthusiasm, we get carried away. Yes, thanks for the advice. I can get a little carried away at times, yes. Need to be mindful of that. Thanks. > Can I forward your post to another list where we are discussing on this > subject, would save me to say the very same things composing another mail, > what is time and energy consuming. > I will keep your name obviously. > Let me know if you agree. Sure, go ahead. My general opinion is that once I written something, it is out of my hands. 6229 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 5:04pm Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello (stream-entry once again...) ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 2:41 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello > Dear Anders > > I resend to actualize what you replied to me one week ago on this issue of > enlightenment claimings. > And indeed even if you don't claim to be a stream enterer, you pretty much > hinted it with your introduction and in your site. Well, the website was created as a way for me to be honest about my own practise, and perhaps inspire others (it seems it serves this purpose as I get a lot of feedback). Thus, it would have to include what I've discovered along the way, and that is what it presents. As I said, I'll leave it to others to try and fit it into nice categories and boxes and define what it is. This is just what I am discovered so far. I'll probably discover more later on, and I'll list that as well. > Let's say you invited us to discuss the issue, you enhanced this > possibility, you stung our curiousity. Well, Cybele, you were the one bringing it up, demanding an answer ;-) I would have been more than content if no-one bothered. > Now apart the various discussions on how to evaluate it in order to assess > the authenticity or not of your mental evolution (what personally I don't > care as the results don't impinge my own research anyway), considering that > you declare not being particularly interested on the fact whether or not you > are a stream enterer, why then did you chose to introduce yourself in such a > provocative fashion, just to create havoc? Well, foolish me thought that that original post would clarify things. I see that that specific post was more than unskilful on my part, and I apologise for any confusion it might have caused. I won't deny that I have had some insights, and as such it could perhaps be interpreted as stream-entry (which I think I failed to make clear in that original post - "interpreted"). But since some of those insights seem to conflict with the Pali Canon, I certainly won't declare them valid in any way. But as I was telling Dan Dalthorp, whom I had the pleasure of conversing with via email, my own understanding of the Pali Canon is "biased" in the sense that I am very much familiar with Mahayana (much more than Theravada) and as such I draw from those teachings as well, in terms of what is true and not true (I don't think either is false. It's just a question of seeing it properly). But it can be difficult to absorb initially from the Thervadan view-point, since they attribute different meanings to labels (not to mention invent new ones). Buddha for instance, is much more generic and basically means anyone who has completed the path, but also Nirvana itself. Anyway, my point is that the website shows what I have discovered. I have no desire myself to interpret that into any Buddhist (or non-Buddhist for that matter) context (such as stream-entry, discovering Nibbana and so on), other than my own practise, which doesn't need definitions. Perhaps I should make this entirely clear: If you must put some label on me, and try to fit your perception of me into a box, then I would advice you to put that perception into the 'crazed deluded heretic' box, and stick with the Pali Canon. Much easier that way. The Pali canon offer guarantees. I don't. > I suppose it is pertinent enquiring about your motivations. > Perhaps you have a hidden agenda and secretively you are planning to > brainwash all of us to become your disciples and give you half of our > salaries. ;-)))) Damn! Need to go find myself another egroup to overtake. > With me you are wasting your time, I am destitute and a bit difficult to > persuade however. :-)))) I'll give you a dollar if you'll convert.... 6230 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 5:26pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 2:57 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! >Dear Anders, >I promise not to quote any scriptures in this message. You probably have noticed that my knowledge of the scripture is spotty at best anyway. >> The Buddha taught that the first link from which the entire Samsaric circle >> arises from is ignorance. > My question is simple: Where did ignorance arise? >As you are well aware of, the buddha taught that all conditioned realities = >arise because there are conditions for them to arise. Ignorance (moha) >is such a reality. As far as beings are concerned, only an arahat has no >more conditions for moha to arise in him. Well, the beginning is not different from the end. I'll explain below. >For moha in particular, it arises within the heart-base (hadaya vathu). Please define heart-base (heart-base, hsin in Chinese) generally means 'Budha-nature' or Nirvana. >While I was writing this message, it seemed to me that you wanted to ask a different question, but I think this answer fits most with the question. Yes, that is correct. My point was that the very first link of dependent co-origination, didn't just arise in a nothingness (since this would imply annihilation) and once the last link is dissolved (parinibbana), there won't just be nothingness left. >Nibbana is a reality, an elment, a dhatu with *distinct* characteristics from all the 28 rupas, 89 citta, and 52 cetasikas. Nibbana is not counted to be part of the aggregates that we take as a person. Nibbana does *not* cognize, but *can* be cognized. Since the only realities that cognize are citta and cetasikas, the only way to verify nibbana is that it *must* be cognizable. Well, as I mentioned in another post, I draw from both Mahayana and Theravada, and I don't think either is untrue. I don't think that Mahayana arose simply as a 'rebellious' way to create a new doctrine. I think it arose out of the need to emphasise parts of the Dhamma which might have been somewhat under-emphasised by the old schools at that given point in time, and thus it highlights aspects of the Dhamma which might not be very strong in the schools before it. But that is just my view. I would like to quote Bodhidharma, the first Patriarch of Zen, to show you what I've been trying to say all along: ..."This mind is the buddha" says the same thing. Beyond this mind you'll never find another Buddha [Nirvana]. To search for enlightenment or nirvana beyond this mind is impossible.... When the mind reaches nirvana, you don't see nirvana, because the mind is nirvana. If you see nirvana somewhere outside the mind, you're deluding yourself. 6231 From: Tori Korshak Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 6:02pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity >Dear Anders, Thank you. I like this very much. The cultivation of uppekha has been very important in my own practice (lots of lobha and dosa to deal with). Metta, Victoria >To cultivate Panna means to know your own mind. To know your own mind, you >have to cease being dragged around by the mind. The way to cease being >dragged around by the mind, is by not sustaining the habits of the mind, >being indulging in or rejecting the objects of the mind. Thus, through >equanimity, not only is Panna nurtured, but defilements are also ended, as >they are no longer sustained. > >Regards, >Anders Honore >************************************************* >Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ >************************************************* > 6232 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 7:14pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Anders Welcome to the list, and thanks for your voluminous contributions of late. What a debut! As you are more familiar with the Mahayana teachings, I thought I would give the Theravadin slant on the question of equanimity and the development of panna (as I understand the texts) in case there is any difference of substance. --- Anders Honoré wrote: > Equanimity is a very important part of Buddhist practise. It means not > having any aversion or fondness of something, or indulging in > indifference > for that matter. It means neither indulging in, or rejecting what you > are > experiencing, not giving in to like and dislike. Thus it is the perfect > countermeasure for attachments of all kinds, as it ends the volitional > cycle. According to the Pali texts, only panna can eradicate defilements and lead towards the end of the volitional cycle. The development of upekkha (equanimity) as one of the Brahma vihara (heavenly abidings) is an aspect of samatha and hence is a high level of kusala but in and of itself leads to continuation of the volitional cycle. With the development of high levels of samatha, it may seem that the kilesa are reduced, but in fact the latent tendencies are being suppressed rather than removed. > To cultivate Panna means to know your own mind. To know your own mind, > you > have to cease being dragged around by the mind. The way to cease being > dragged around by the mind, is by not sustaining the habits of the mind, > being indulging in or rejecting the objects of the mind. Thus, through > equanimity, not only is Panna nurtured, but defilements are also ended, > as > they are no longer sustained. The development of panna is not contingent on, or particularly assisted by, developing equanimity. The function of panna is to know the true characteristic of a reality, any reality, appearing at the present moment. That reality may be a wholesome or an unwholesome one, or it may be a rupa (ie. not a reality that we take for the mind). And there cannot be panna of realities without the development of awareness of realities. But equanimity is not a prerequisite, nor even particularly an advantage. How does this compare with the Mahayana teachings as you understand them? Jon 6233 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 7:36pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning ...thanks Anders Dear Anders Thank you very much, will be very helpful. Sadhu x 3 for your generosity. :-) Regards Cybele > > Can I forward your post to another list where we are discussing on this > > subject, would save me to say the very same things composing another >mail, > > what is time and energy consuming. > > I will keep your name obviously. > > Let me know if you agree. > >Sure, go ahead. My general opinion is that once I written something, it is >out of my hands. > 6234 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 7:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello (stream-entry once again...) Dear Anders > > > > > Let's say you invited us to discuss the issue, you enhanced this > > possibility, you stung our curiousity. >Well, Cybele, you were the one bringing it up, demanding an answer ;-) I would have been more than content if no-one bothered. Indeed I am very nosy, always probing, probing, it's in my nature. :-) But with your exploit was difficult for us to be restrained. > >Perhaps I should make this entirely clear: If you must put some label on >me, >and try to fit your perception of me into a box, then I would advice you to >put that perception into the 'crazed deluded heretic' box, and stick with >the Pali Canon. Much easier that way. The Pali canon offer guarantees. I >don't. I don't label or enclose people in any box like perception, lucky me I am too openminded for it. But must say that this 'trademark' pleases me very much, lobha, lobha being an heretic myself! Oh pardon, there is no self...what a gaffe! > > > I suppose it is pertinent enquiring about your motivations. > > Perhaps you have a hidden agenda and secretively you are planning to > > brainwash all of us to become your disciples and give you half of our > > salaries. ;-)))) > >Damn! Need to go find myself another egroup to overtake. > > > With me you are wasting your time, I am destitute and a bit difficult to > > persuade however. :-)))) > >I'll give you a dollar if you'll convert.... Please make two and it's a deal!!! :-)))) LOve Cybele 6235 From: Sukinderpal Narula Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 8:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) Dear Cybele, Not sure if I can say that I have 'arrived' at your wavelength of communication. But reading you certainly has made me aware of my tendency to misconstrue. By accumulations I am quite slow to understanding others, but now I know in part, why. And it has been quite liberating. Thankyou and much Metta, Sukin. ps: I live in Bangkok and will definately meet you when you come. cybele chiodi wrote: > Dear Sukin > > I am so glad that we are communicating eventually. > I am prone to persist in this dialogues exactly to improve our communication > skills and clarify doubts and misunderstandings. > This sharings are a great, meaningful opportunity of practice of right > understanding for me. > A bit if goodwill, a handful of humour and let's take it easy without > competitions, being honest and not conceited in our exchanges. > Nice knowing you too. > Btw do you live in Thailand? > If so for sure we are going to meet soon, around september or so. > > Love > > Cybele 6236 From: m. nease Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 8:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Dear Derek, I looked at this one too, and several others where ignorance is referred to as an asava. I've still been unable to find one referring to it as a cause for ignorance--I'll keep you posted. mike --- Derek Cameron wrote: > --- Howard wrote: > > I recall that there is a sutta in which the > Buddha points > out that > > avijja (ignorance) is not a "first cause", but is, > itself caused. I > seem to > > recall that the asava ("outflowings") may have > been given as the > cause of > > ignorance. I don't recall which sutta it is. > > Hello, Howard, > > Toward the end of the Saamaññaphala Sutta (DN 2) it > says that avijjaa > ("ignorance") *is* one of the aasava > ("outflowings"). > > Derek. > 6237 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 8:46pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Communication skills - Sukin Dear Sukin > >Dear Cybele, >Not sure if I can say that I have 'arrived' at your wavelength >of communication. But reading you certainly has made me aware >of my tendency to misconstrue. By accumulations I am quite slow >to understanding others, but now I know in part, why. And it has >been quite liberating. >Thankyou and much Metta, > >Sukin. >ps: I live in Bangkok and will definately meet you when you come. > I suppose that by accumulations I am very extroverted and communicative and very keen on understanding others; I am hyperempathic with life what leads me to a lot a lobha. Never mind, I cope with my lust for life. Glad to know you live in Bkk, I have a very modest room in Pratunam. Will be nice meeting you; sometimes I strive in Bangkok because of the language, I speak very little Thai and people speak very little English. Well I am learning to develop a different kind of language to communicate far beyond the possibilities of speech and much more meaningful. I get along well with Thais and Asians generally because I am a smiling person and so are they. I miss their smiles when I am in Europe. Looking forward to meet you Love Cybele 6238 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 8:38pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 1:14 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity > Anders > > Welcome to the list, and thanks for your voluminous contributions of late. > What a debut! Haha, thanks. It was actually my intention to just say hello, and then fade into the background for a while. Perhaps I'll fade later on... > As you are more familiar with the Mahayana teachings, I thought I would > give the Theravadin slant on the question of equanimity and the > development of panna (as I understand the texts) in case there is any > difference of substance. I think it's important not mistake the various categorisations as an actual exposition of truth. One needs to look into the causal factors that these create, rather than the labels and categories fit into, and from that determine id its valid or not. > --- Anders Honoré wrote: > > Equanimity is a very important part of Buddhist practise. It means not > > having any aversion or fondness of something, or indulging in > > indifference > > for that matter. It means neither indulging in, or rejecting what you > > are > > experiencing, not giving in to like and dislike. Thus it is the perfect > > countermeasure for attachments of all kinds, as it ends the volitional > > cycle. > > According to the Pali texts, only panna can eradicate defilements and lead > towards the end of the volitional cycle. I agree. Even the attempt to be equanimous involves some sort of rejection or indulgence. But it helps to end volitional cycles at "lower" levels, so to speak. > The development of upekkha > (equanimity) as one of the Brahma vihara (heavenly abidings) is an aspect > of samatha and hence is a high level of kusala but in and of itself leads > to continuation of the volitional cycle. With the development of high > levels of samatha, it may seem that the kilesa are reduced, but in fact > the latent tendencies are being suppressed rather than removed. I am not sure about this, but isn't equanimity also part of the seven factors of awakening? Is it implied as an object of Samatha there as well? > > > > To cultivate Panna means to know your own mind. To know your own mind, > > you > > have to cease being dragged around by the mind. The way to cease being > > dragged around by the mind, is by not sustaining the habits of the mind, > > being indulging in or rejecting the objects of the mind. Thus, through > > equanimity, not only is Panna nurtured, but defilements are also ended, > > as > > they are no longer sustained. > > The development of panna is not contingent on, or particularly assisted > by, developing equanimity. The function of panna is to know the true > characteristic of a reality, any reality, appearing at the present moment. > That reality may be a wholesome or an unwholesome one, or it may be a > rupa (ie. not a reality that we take for the mind). And there cannot be > panna of realities without the development of awareness of realities. But > equanimity is not a prerequisite, nor even particularly an advantage. From the view-point of Equanimity as a Samatha practise, I agree with this. Panna arises when one observes cause and effect. But it is quite difficult to observe it properly, if you are being dragged around by it, through clinging. I would say that equanimity helps you cease clinging to it, in order to observe it. > How does this compare with the Mahayana teachings as you understand them? It is difficult to say, since the approach is very different.... 6239 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 8:45pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello (stream-entry once again...) ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 1:55 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello (stream-entry once again...) > >Perhaps I should make this entirely clear: If you must put some label on > >me, > >and try to fit your perception of me into a box, then I would advice you to > >put that perception into the 'crazed deluded heretic' box, and stick with > >the Pali Canon. Much easier that way. The Pali canon offer guarantees. I > >don't. > > I don't label or enclose people in any box like perception, lucky me I am > too openminded for it. > But must say that this 'trademark' pleases me very much, lobha, lobha being > an heretic myself! > Oh pardon, there is no self...what a gaffe! It's all good at a conceptual level... > >I'll give you a dollar if you'll convert.... > > > Please make two and it's a deal!!! :-)))) Deal and done! (reminds me of a Simpson's episode where Homer tries to convince his family what a shrewd negotiator he is, when Bart says "I'll trade you this delicious doorknob for your crummy old doughnut." Homer says "Deal and done!") :-) 6240 From: Derek Cameron Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 9:12pm Subject: Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! --- Howard wrote: > Notice that this includes: "With the arising of the taints there is > the arising of ignorance; with the cessation of the taints there is the > cessation of ignorance." And yet, as you point out, ignorance, itself, is > given as one of the four taints. (So, it is a little confusing, unless > ignorance as a taint is considered to be different in some manner from > ignorance as a factor in the cycle of dependent arising.) Howard -- Yes, it is confusing. Actually, my personal belief is that this kind of deep knowledge can't be realized merely by thinking about it. All the many suttas that describe these higher knowledges mention them as coming about as a result of practice. That ties in nicely with the teachings of the Kaalaama Sutta (AN III.65) which several people have referred to recently. Anders -- I loved your little aside about how the Kaalaama Sutta itself is not to be relied upon, according to the Kaalaama Sutta! As far as your question about "where everything started from" is concerned, I don't think anyone has yet mentioned the lines: "There is, bhikkhus, a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not- conditioned. If, bhikkhus, there were no not-born, not-brought-to- being, not-made, not-conditioned, no escape would be discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned. But since there is a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned, therefore an escape is discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned" (Udaana VIII.3, repeated at Itivuttaka 43). Derek. 6241 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 9:23pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Internet skills Dear group I apologyse for my duplicate messages - have no idea why is happening. I am very attentive while pressing the mouse whether to avoid it. Have no clue what is happening. Sorry be patient! Cybele 6242 From: Tori Korshak Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 11:05pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Jon, Thank you for this, but I am puzzled. If developing equanimity helps to curb lobha and dosa (and it does in my experience), is that not an aid to knowing the true characteristic of a reality? If I am not blinded by my own clinging or aversions , are these realities not more likely to be seen clearly? Why is it not an advantage to panna to abandon clinging and develop equanimity? I wouldn't trust a monk for example who exhibited a lot of dosa to have panna. Thank you for your help. Metta, Victoria >The development of panna is not contingent on, or particularly assisted >by, developing equanimity. The function of panna is to know the true >characteristic of a reality, any reality, appearing at the present moment. > That reality may be a wholesome or an unwholesome one, or it may be a >rupa (ie. not a reality that we take for the mind). And there cannot be >panna of realities without the development of awareness of realities. But >equanimity is not a prerequisite, nor even particularly an advantage. > >How does this compare with the Mahayana teachings as you understand them? > >Jon > 6243 From: Howard Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 7:06pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Hi, Anders (and Jon) - In a message dated 7/13/01 9:39:06 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Anders Honore writes: > > Anders > > > > Welcome to the list, and thanks for your voluminous contributions of late. > > What a debut! > > Haha, thanks. It was actually my intention to just say hello, and then fade > into the background for a while. Perhaps I'll fade later on... > > > As you are more familiar with the Mahayana teachings, I thought I would > > give the Theravadin slant on the question of equanimity and the > > development of panna (as I understand the texts) in case there is any > > difference of substance. > > I think it's important not mistake the various categorisations as an actual > exposition of truth. One needs to look into the causal factors that these > create, rather than the labels and categories fit into, and from that > determine id its valid or not. > > > --- Anders Honoré wrote: > > > Equanimity is a very important part of Buddhist practise. It means not > > > having any aversion or fondness of something, or indulging in > > > indifference > > > for that matter. It means neither indulging in, or rejecting what you > > > are > > > experiencing, not giving in to like and dislike. Thus it is the perfect > > > countermeasure for attachments of all kinds, as it ends the volitional > > > cycle. > > > > According to the Pali texts, only panna can eradicate defilements and lead > > towards the end of the volitional cycle. > > I agree. Even the attempt to be equanimous involves some sort of rejection > or indulgence. But it helps to end volitional cycles at "lower" levels, so > to speak. > > > The development of upekkha > > (equanimity) as one of the Brahma vihara (heavenly abidings) is an aspect > > of samatha and hence is a high level of kusala but in and of itself leads > > to continuation of the volitional cycle. With the development of high > > levels of samatha, it may seem that the kilesa are reduced, but in fact > > the latent tendencies are being suppressed rather than removed. > > I am not sure about this, but isn't equanimity also part of the seven > factors of awakening? Is it implied as an object of Samatha there as well? > > > > > > > > To cultivate Panna means to know your own mind. To know your own mind, > > > you > > > have to cease being dragged around by the mind. The way to cease being > > > dragged around by the mind, is by not sustaining the habits of the mind, > > > being indulging in or rejecting the objects of the mind. Thus, through > > > equanimity, not only is Panna nurtured, but defilements are also ended, > > > as > > > they are no longer sustained. > > > > The development of panna is not contingent on, or particularly assisted > > by, developing equanimity. The function of panna is to know the true > > characteristic of a reality, any reality, appearing at the present moment. > > That reality may be a wholesome or an unwholesome one, or it may be a > > rupa (ie. not a reality that we take for the mind). And there cannot be > > panna of realities without the development of awareness of realities. But > > equanimity is not a prerequisite, nor even particularly an advantage. > > From the view-point of Equanimity as a Samatha practise, I agree with this. > Panna arises when one observes cause and effect. But it is quite difficult > to observe it properly, if you are being dragged around by it, through > clinging. I would say that equanimity helps you cease clinging to it, in > order to observe it. > > > How does this compare with the Mahayana teachings as you understand them? > > It is difficult to say, since the approach is very different.... > > > ================================== The following is drawn from Wings to Awakening (from Access to Insight). I think it is relevant to this discussion. Particularly interesting to me is the distinction made between the alleged sutta-perspective and the abhidhamma-perspective. You, Jon, I believe, have Abhidhamma as your main influence? The material follows: *************************************************** G. The Seven Factors of Awakening [ Previous Section | Table of Contents | Next Section ] [ Jump down to passages §§92-100 ] The seven factors of Awakening (bojjhanga) are closely related to the practice of the four frames of reference. The texts use two patterns to describe this relationship. The first pattern is a spiral, showing how the seven factors of Awakening build on the four frames of reference [§92]. This point is reflected in the position of mindfulness -- defined as the practice of any one of the four frames of reference -- as the first factor in the list. Discernment, in the role of the analysis of mental qualities into skillful and unskillful, builds on right mindfulness and leads to persistence, which in the form of right effort/exertion maximizes the skillful qualities and minimizes the unskillful ones. This in turn leads to four factors associated with jhana: rapture, serenity, concentration, and equanimity. Equanimity, here, is not a neutral feeling, but rather a balancing or moderation -- an evenness of mind -- with regard to any feeling or object that arises. It is identical with the equanimity in the fourth jhana [§149] and with the inherent equanimity in the fifth factor of five-factored noble concentration [§150], which can develop out of any of the four jhanas. As such it can either lead to greater mastery of meditation -- as the purity of mindfulness that accompanies the fourth jhana provides the basis for even more precise analysis of qualities, thus allowing the causal loop to spiral to a higher level -- or else develop into the state of non-fashioning that opens to Awakening. Abhidhamma texts seem to contradict the point that equanimity feeds back into mindfulness in this way, for they maintain that the factors of Awakening are transcendent -- in other words, that they come into play only as one reaches the point of Awakening, where no temporal feedback would take place. The discourses, however, show that the factors of Awakening can function in the development of mundane concentration as well. Passage §96 shows how the "feeding" of the factors of Awakening is needed to "starve" the hindrances, mental qualities that have to be suppressed before mundane concentration can be attained. Passage §98 shows how the factors function in developing the four attitudes that lead to "release of awareness" -- a mundane form of release -- and indicates the highest state to which those attitudes can lead for one who has penetrated no higher, i.e., who has attained none of the transcendent levels. These passages demonstrate that the factors of Awakening can function on the level of mundane jhana in addition to the level at the verge of Awakening. Thus, equanimity as a factor of Awakening on the mundane plane can feed back into the process of meditation, providing a steady basis for more continuous mindfulness and clearer analysis of mental qualities, until all the factors of the list ripen to transcendence. ********************************************** 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) 6244 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 11:20pm Subject: re: Rules for Married couples. --- "craig garner" wrote: > Dear Sangha, could anybody please give me some clues to what kind of rules a buddhist couple should follow? with refference to marriage etc... I have read a bit hear and a bit there but it seems a little confusing for me, at least maybe a few of you could point me in the right dirrection it would be much appreciated. with metta Craig. > > > Dear Craig, I am not part of the sangha, but according to the Budha teaching, anybody should strive to understand the realities as they truly are. With that, other things are (most likely) to follow, like the 5 precepts, etc. If you strictly follow the scripture in this regard in all the different ways (follow exactly what the Buddha said about what a marriage couple should do), you may not like them too much. The conventional, societal views about the interactions between the couple were different in Buddha India than they are today. kom 6245 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 11:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] re: Rules for Married couples. Dear Craig, There are a few points in the sigalovada sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn31.html robert > --- "craig garner" > wrote: > > Dear Sangha, could anybody please give me some clues to what > kind of > rules a buddhist couple should follow? with refference to > marriage etc... I > have read a bit hear and a bit there but it seems a little > confusing for me, > at least maybe a few of you could point me in the right > dirrection it would > be much appreciated. with metta Craig. > > > 6246 From: robert Date: Fri Jul 13, 2001 11:56pm Subject: Re: The meaning of Equanimity --- Tori Korshak wrote: > > Dear Jon, > > Thank you for this, but I am puzzled. If developing equanimity helps to > curb lobha and dosa (and it does in my experience), is that not an aid to > knowing the true characteristic of a reality? If I am not blinded by my own > clinging or aversions , are these realities not more likely to be seen > clearly? Why is it not an advantage to panna to abandon clinging and > develop equanimity? I wouldn't trust a monk for example who exhibited a lot > of dosa to have panna. ______________________________ Dear Tori, I think what really blinds you to these realities is that they are taken as self, as "my dosa, my lobha". I wrote a post to Paul a while back that may have bearing on this. >>"Sarah told me a story. When she was staying with friends in Australia (old students of khun Sujin), they were taking her to the airport to catch a flight back to hong kong. They were running very late and sarah was showing some agitation. These friends then said that "this shows how much more understanding Sujin has"; because a few months earlier the same thing happened when Sujin was visiting Australia -they only got her on the flight with minutes to spare. BUT Sujin showed no concern at all. Later on when Sarah commented on this to Khun Sujin all she said was "they don't understand the path". You see we can't tell someones understanding by how calm they appear. I can't be surprised or even much disapointed when anger arises (in myself or others) as it seems such a natural thing. It is sankhara dhamma , conditioned phenomena, it arises because there are the right coincidence of paccaya (conditions) for this to happen. In earlier days I would have tried to do something, and felt guilty, but this is 'putting an extra head on top of the original one". I have had the benefit of knowing many different cult members. Some of them have the idea that they should always be happy - so they always act happy. or some think thye should act serious (because of dukkha) so they act serious. Actually it is not really an act as they aim towards happy feeling or serious feeling and so build up the conditions for this. Of course they don't always succeed but they head in such directions. However, to my thinking although they keep outward sila to a high degree, they don't have insight into real Dhamma. They are clinging to view and self , to virtue and ritual . (silabataparamasa). In the Brahmajala sutta (trans. Bodhi All embracing net of views p56) "It is bhikkhus only to trifling and insignificant matters, to the minor details of mere moral virtue, that a wordling would refer when speaking in praise of the Tathagata. And what are those trifling matters, those minor details of mere moral virtue?" the sutta then lists many virtues such as not killing or stealing, being chaste, no harsh speech, no idle chatter.. no meals after midday....etc. As your post indicates your friends and relatives look at your outer behaviour, they try to estimate your wisdom based on this. They don't know that only an anagami has eradicated anger forever; they don't know that someone may have suppressed lust and anger for their whole life - by true samatha - but have no insight into the true nature of dhammas; that someone else again might appear always calm but only have clinging to pleasant feeling. If they discussed much with you they would know more about your insight - then they would know that, as a disciple of the buddha, you can help them understand life in profound ways. Then they wouldn't be so concerned about slips in behaviour. maybe they would think it is natural - if they understood the conditioned nature of dhammas. robert 6247 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 0:14am Subject: Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" > > Well, the beginning is not different from the end. I'll explain below. I have actually never contemplated the beginning myself. Because of that, = only the scripture is a guide. There are other on-going thread that discusses the sutta(s?) that the Buddha mentioned that: a) Ignorance rises out of asava (a kind of tanha) b) Ignorance rises out of tanha (craving) I still don't have a clue what you are implying, but it seems we are discussing how ignorance rises out of something in the beginning of the samsaric cycle, which implies how it could end? Is this where you are leading to? (The beginning wouldn't ever be verifiable, even though the end will at least be implied by the enlightenment.) > > >For moha in particular, it arises within the heart-base (hadaya vathu). > > Please define heart-base (heart-base, hsin in Chinese) generally means > 'Budha-nature' or Nirvana. The vathu rupa, which heart-base (hadaya vathu) is, is a conditioned materiality said to be located in the middle of the heart (and somewhere else if without a heart!). It is a place of rising for many types of consciousness and mental factors. It is certainly not Nibbana. > Yes, that is correct. My point was that the very first link of dependent > co-origination, didn't just arise in a nothingness (since this would impl= y > annihilation) and once the last link is dissolved (parinibbana), there won't > just be nothingness left. I don't believe there are any scripture explaining the end of samsaric cycl= e by the process of how it comes in the beginning. There is only: without this, that can't come to be, etc (and nibbana is definitely *not* included = as a link). Even though I may be able to able to derive (if not contrive!) such a logic, I wouldn't trust it much myself. Logic (or my logical mind) = has failed to reveal the truths many many times. The buddha didn't expound the beginning much at all (even related to explaining the end), it = would only lead to more delusion to think I can explain as such. > Well, as I mentioned in another post, I draw from both Mahayana and > Theravada, and I don't think either is untrue. I don't think that Mahayan= a > arose simply as a 'rebellious' way to create a > new doctrine. I think it arose out of the need to emphasise parts of the > Dhamma which might have been somewhat under-emphasised by the old schools at > that given point in time, and thus it highlights aspects of the Dhamma which > might not be very strong in the schools before it. But that is just my view. > I would like to quote Bodhidharma, the first Patriarch of Zen, to show you > what I've been trying to say all along: > ..."This mind is the buddha" says the same thing. Beyond this mind you'll= > never find another Buddha [Nirvana]. To search for enlightenment or nirvana > beyond this mind is impossible.... When the mind reaches nirvana, you don't > see nirvana, because the mind is nirvana. If you see nirvana somewhere > outside the mind, you're deluding yourself. The theravadans try to stick to the original text as much as possible for knowing (or fearing, for some of us) that diverging from it will distort th= e meanings of the teachings. I am quite sure that some of the distortions introduced by different people (even in translations), intentional or not, = calling themselves Theravadan or not, with or without delusion while so doing, more often lead people to the wrong end than the right one. The Buddha dhamma is incredibly subtle, a distortion sometimes serves as a hinderance (conventional, not the 5 hinderances!) rather than an aid to the understanding, and ultimately the realization. Again, just like the concept of duality, I can somewhat map what Bodhidharma said to the Theravadan frame of references, but not completely, especially the part "the mind is nirvana." kom 6248 From: Tori Korshak Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 0:39am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity At 03:56 PM 7/13/01 +0000, you wrote: >--- Tori Korshak wrote: > > Dear Robert, Now it's my turn to be puzzled by your post. More below. > > Dear Jon, > > > > Thank you for this, but I am puzzled. If developing equanimity >helps to > > curb lobha and dosa (and it does in my experience), is that not an >aid to > > knowing the true characteristic of a reality? If I am not blinded >by my own > > clinging or aversions , are these realities not more likely to be >seen > > clearly? Why is it not an advantage to panna to abandon clinging >and > > develop equanimity? I wouldn't trust a monk for example who >exhibited a lot > > of dosa to have panna. >______________________________ >Dear Tori, >I think what really blinds you to these realities is that they are >taken as self, as "my dosa, my lobha". >I wrote a post to Paul a while back that may have bearing on this. > >>"Sarah told me a story. When she was staying with friends in >Australia (old students of khun Sujin), they were taking her to >the airport to catch a flight back to hong kong. They were >running very late and sarah was showing some agitation. >These friends then said that "this shows how much more >understanding Sujin has"; because a few months earlier the same >thing happened when Sujin was visiting Australia -they only got >her on the flight with minutes to spare. BUT Sujin showed no >concern at all. >Later on when Sarah commented on this to Khun Sujin all she said >was "they don't understand the path". Well for example, I can relate to this. Since studying and meditating, I find that when traveling, things like delays and missed flights truly don't disturb me the way they used to. This is not pretending but a big change. Of course one doesn't like to inconvenience others who have made plans at the other end but when it can't be helped there is more acceptance and understanding that my reaction one way or the other won't change events. >You see we can't tell someones understanding by how calm they >appear. No-only one can know that for oneself-not others. >I can't be surprised or even much disapointed when anger arises >(in myself or others) as it seems such a natural thing. It is >sankhara dhamma , conditioned phenomena, it arises because there >are the right coincidence of paccaya (conditions) for this to >happen. I agree but there are fewer conditions arising now that understanding is changing. > In earlier days I would have tried to do something, and >felt guilty, but this is 'putting an extra head on top of the >original one". Yes after the fact one cannot stop the arising. Only through understanding beforehand. >I have had the benefit of knowing many different cult members. >Some of them have the idea that they should always be happy - so >they always act happy. or some think thye should act serious >(because of dukkha) so they act serious. Actually it is not >really an act as they aim towards happy feeling or serious >feeling and so build up the conditions for this. Of course they >don't always succeed but they head in such directions. However, >to my thinking although they keep outward sila to a high degree, >they don't have insight into real Dhamma. They are clinging to >view and self , to virtue and ritual . (silabataparamasa). >In the Brahmajala sutta (trans. Bodhi All embracing net of >views p56) "It is bhikkhus only to trifling and insignificant >matters, to the minor details of mere moral virtue, that a >wordling would refer when speaking in praise of the Tathagata. >And what are those trifling matters, those minor details of mere >moral virtue?" the sutta then lists many virtues such as not >killing or stealing, being chaste, no harsh speech, no idle >chatter.. no meals after midday....etc. This is not what I understand as equanimity. >As your post indicates your friends and relatives look at your >outer behaviour, My post was not intending to indicate this. Why did you think so? >they try to estimate your wisdom based on this. >They don't know that only an anagami has eradicated anger >forever; they don't know that someone may have suppressed lust >and anger for their whole life - by true samatha - but have no >insight into the true nature of dhammas; that someone else again might >appear always calm but only have clinging to pleasant feeling. >If they discussed much with you they would know more about your >insight - then they would know that, as a disciple of the >buddha, you can help them understand life in profound ways. Then >they wouldn't be so concerned about slips in behaviour. maybe >they would think it is natural - if they understood the >conditioned nature of dhammas. What? I think we're on different subjects here. I don't confuse calm with equanimity. I have always been calm but equanimity is something relatively new to me. I don't know if anyone else is trying to estimate my wisdom, but I don't think it's a high priority. >robert > >Metta, Victoria 6249 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 1:10am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity Dear Tori, I think I was unclear. From "I wrote a post to paul a while back that may have bearing on this.." All of the rest is simply a cut and paste from a post I wrote to Paul that I thought might have had some mild bearing on this. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5503 As you show it was in fact completely off the topic. sorry robert --- Tori Korshak wrote: > At 03:56 PM 7/13/01 +0000, you wrote: > >--- Tori Korshak > wrote: > > > > > > Dear Robert, > Now it's my turn to be puzzled by your post. More below. > > > > Dear Jon, > > > > > > Thank you for this, but I am puzzled. If developing > equanimity > >helps to > > > curb lobha and dosa (and it does in my experience), is > that not an > >aid to > > > knowing the true characteristic of a reality? If I am not > blinded > >by my own > > > clinging or aversions , are these realities not more > likely to be > >seen > > > clearly? Why is it not an advantage to panna to abandon > clinging > >and > > > develop equanimity? I wouldn't trust a monk for example > who > >exhibited a lot > > > of dosa to have panna. > >______________________________ > >Dear Tori, > >I think what really blinds you to these realities is that > they are > >taken as self, as "my dosa, my lobha". > >I wrote a post to Paul a while back that may have bearing on > this. > > >>"Sarah told me a story. When she was staying with friends > in > >Australia (old students of khun Sujin), they were taking her > to > >the airport to catch a flight back to hong kong. They were > >running very late and sarah was showing some agitation. > >These friends then said that "this shows how much more > >understanding Sujin has"; because a few months earlier the > same > >thing happened when Sujin was visiting Australia -they only > got > >her on the flight with minutes to spare. BUT Sujin showed no > >concern at all. > >Later on when Sarah commented on this to Khun Sujin all she > said > >was "they don't understand the path". > > > Well for example, I can relate to this. Since studying and > meditating, I > find that when traveling, things like delays and missed > flights truly don't > disturb me the way they used to. This is not pretending but a > big change. > Of course one doesn't like to inconvenience others who have > made plans at > the other end but when it can't be helped there is more > acceptance and > understanding that my reaction one way or the other won't > change events. > > > >You see we can't tell someones understanding by how calm they > >appear. > > No-only one can know that for oneself-not others. > > >I can't be surprised or even much disapointed when anger > arises > >(in myself or others) as it seems such a natural thing. It is > >sankhara dhamma , conditioned phenomena, it arises because > there > >are the right coincidence of paccaya (conditions) for this to > >happen. > > I agree but there are fewer conditions arising now that > understanding is > changing. > > > In earlier days I would have tried to do something, and > >felt guilty, but this is 'putting an extra head on top of the > >original one". > > Yes after the fact one cannot stop the arising. Only through > understanding > beforehand. > > >I have had the benefit of knowing many different cult > members. > >Some of them have the idea that they should always be happy - > so > >they always act happy. or some think thye should act serious > >(because of dukkha) so they act serious. Actually it is not > >really an act as they aim towards happy feeling or serious > >feeling and so build up the conditions for this. Of course > they > >don't always succeed but they head in such directions. > However, > >to my thinking although they keep outward sila to a high > degree, > >they don't have insight into real Dhamma. They are clinging > to > >view and self , to virtue and ritual . (silabataparamasa). > >In the Brahmajala sutta (trans. Bodhi All embracing net of > >views p56) "It is bhikkhus only to trifling and insignificant > >matters, to the minor details of mere moral virtue, that a > >wordling would refer when speaking in praise of the > Tathagata. > >And what are those trifling matters, those minor details of > mere > >moral virtue?" the sutta then lists many virtues such as not > >killing or stealing, being chaste, no harsh speech, no idle > >chatter.. no meals after midday....etc. > > This is not what I understand as equanimity. > > > >As your post indicates your friends and relatives look at > your > >outer behaviour, > > My post was not intending to indicate this. Why did you think > so? > > >they try to estimate your wisdom based on this. > >They don't know that only an anagami has eradicated anger > >forever; they don't know that someone may have suppressed > lust > >and anger for their whole life - by true samatha - but have > no > >insight into the true nature of dhammas; that someone else > again might > >appear always calm but only have clinging to pleasant > feeling. > >If they discussed much with you they would know more about > your > >insight - then they would know that, as a disciple of the > >buddha, you can help them understand life in profound ways. > Then > >they wouldn't be so concerned about slips in behaviour. maybe > >they would think it is natural - if they understood the > >conditioned nature of dhammas. > > What? I think we're on different subjects here. > I don't confuse calm with equanimity. I have always been calm > but > equanimity is something relatively new to me. I don't know if > anyone else > is trying to estimate my wisdom, but I don't think it's a high > priority. > > >robert > > > >Metta, > > Victoria > 6250 From: Tori Korshak Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 1:42am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity > >Dear Robert, Ah now I understand. Thanks for clearing the confusion! Metta, Victoria Also thanks to Howard for helpful reference in Wings to Awakening which,coincidentally, I have been reading at the moment. It does say that equanimity is a factor on the path to Awakening. >Robert, > > Now it's my turn to be puzzled by your post. More below. > > > > > > Dear Jon, > > > > > > > > Thank you for this, but I am puzzled. If developing > > equanimity > > >helps to > > > > curb lobha and dosa (and it does in my experience), is > > that not an > > >aid to > > > > knowing the true characteristic of a reality? If I am not > > blinded > > >by my own > > > > clinging or aversions , are these realities not more > > likely to be > > >seen > > > > clearly? Why is it not an advantage to panna to abandon > > clinging > > >and > > > > develop equanimity? I wouldn't trust a monk for example > > who > > >exhibited a lot > > > > of dosa to have panna. > > >______________________________ 6251 From: craig garner Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 1:38am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] re: Rules for Married couples. ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 5:20 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] re: Rules for Married couples. > Dear kom and robert, thanks for your directions I will search around and see what else I can find on the subject. Best wishes Craig 6252 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 4:50am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity Dear Rob But are you not supposed to be a sotapanna? A Sotapanna can go 'off topic'? I think you are ageing that's it! ;-))))) Better you are becoming wiser and a bit messy... ;-) Love Cybele 6253 From: m. nease Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 6:05am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Jon, --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > According to the Pali texts, only panna can > eradicate defilements and lead > towards the end of the volitional cycle. The > development of upekkha > (equanimity) as one of the Brahma vihara (heavenly > abidings) is an aspect > of samatha and hence is a high level of kusala but > in and of itself leads > to continuation of the volitional cycle. With the > development of high > levels of samatha, it may seem that the kilesa are > reduced, but in fact > the latent tendencies are being suppressed rather > than removed. Great post. I'm a great fan of equanimity too, meaning that I very much like anything which conditions it--a certain sign of akusala (the liking, I mean). I also think that everything in your post is spot on in the context of satipatthana in everyday life. > The development of panna is not contingent on, or > particularly assisted > by, developing equanimity. I guess it could be argued that upekkhaa contributes to paññaa and to the eradication of defilements when it is a feature of some of the advanced jhana states which lead to nibbana by way of the jhanas. As I have no experience of this and don't expect to, I don't give it that much thought. Outside this (I think) very unusual context, and certainly for the purposes of most of our experience, I think your points are very well made (for what my opinion's worth). mike 6254 From: Christine Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 7:07am Subject: was No Subject - now A Happy Married Life Hi Craig, An interesting on-line book may be of some use to you: "A Happy Married Life" by Ven. Sri K. Dhammananda http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha186.htm metta, Christine --- "craig garner" wrote: > Dear Sangha, could anybody please give me some clues to what kind of rules a buddhist couple should follow? with refference to marriage etc... I have read a bit hear and a bit there but it seems a little confusing for me, at least maybe a few of you could point me in the right dirrection it would be much appreciated. with metta Craig. > > > 6255 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 7:15am Subject: Re: The meaning of Equanimity Dear Mike, Indifferent feeling (Upekkha cetasika) can arise in both wholesome and unwholesome dhamma. Equanimity (tatra-majjhattata cetasika) can rise *only* in wholesome dhamma. Equanimity implies the co-arising consciousness and mental factors must be wholesome. Equanimity, just like any other dhamma, comes in different strength. Equanimity in dana results in a giving. Equanimity in tranquil meditation results eventually in Jhana. Equanimity in satipatthana (as in a factor of englightenment) results eventually in the 8-fold paths. Equanimity in dana and equanimity in tranquil meditation don't directly result in the 8-fold path; otherwise, even people without the teachings of Buddha would become enlightened. Equanimity in dana and equanimity in tranquil meditation, with the concurrance of satipathana, probably support one another (I have heard TA Sujin mentioning a sutta that says any kusala "contribute"). There has been some discussions about this, although without conclusion (in my view). kom 6257 From: Joe Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 8:45am Subject: Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! I believe this may be one of the issues touched upon in a book called The Problem of Mind in Buddhism. It's out of print nowadays I think, but it's basically a review of Buddhist definitions of mind and consciousness (across sects) from the perspective of modern western philosophy. The conclusion was, if I remember correctly, that neither mind nor consciousness are ever satisfactorily defined (again, from the perspective of modern logic) in Buddhist texts, and that the explanations are contradictory. Doesn't bother me, since I don't expect Buddhism to be logical or scientific. But many people do. Joe --- Howard wrote: > Hi again, Derek - > > > I found the following on the Access to Insight site. It is from the sutta > I had in mind: > > > Ignorance > > avijja > > > The definition > > > > "And what is ignorance, what is the origin of ignorance, what is the > > cessation of ignorance, what is the way leading to the cessation of > > ignorance? Not knowing about dukkha, not knowing about the origin of dukkha > > , not knowing about the cessation of dukkha, not knowing about the way > > leading to the cessation of dukkha -- this is called ignorance. With the > > arising of the taints there is the arising of ignorance; with the cessation > > of the taints there is the cessation of ignorance. The way leading to the > > cessation of ignorance is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right > > view...right concentration." ... "And what are the taints, what is the > > origin of the taints, what is the cessation of the taints, what is the way > > leading to the cessation of the taints? There are three taints: the taint > > of sensual desire, the taint of being and the taint of ignorance. With the > > arising of ignorance there is the arising of the taints. With the cessation > > of ignorance there is the cessation of the taints. The way leading to the > > cessation of the taints is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right > > view...right concentration." > > >> -- MN 9 > > > Notice that this includes: "With the arising of the taints there is > the arising of ignorance; with the cessation of the taints there is the > cessation of ignorance." And yet, as you point out, ignorance, itself, is > given as one of the four taints. (So, it is a little confusing, unless > ignorance as a taint is considered to be different in some manner from > ignorance as a factor in the cycle of dependent arising.) > > 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) > 6258 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 9:56am Subject: Loving kindness for a friend >>Dear group >> >>I have a special appeal to make: I came to know this evening about a dear >>friend of mine, a commited buddhist and a lovely human being >>who has to >>undergoe by-pass surgery next week. >>He is going to be admitted in hospital on Monday and surgery is planned to >>Wednesday morning Asian time. >>I am concerned with him and wish I could be there to help. >>But I can't at least not physically. My heart sure will be there, close to >>this friend. >>I would like to make an appeal to whoever believe in the power of Metta >>and is in goodwill to concentrate on this person and send him >>healing >>vibrations of loving kindness. >>I am very grateful if you feel like collaborating in this mind-heart >>sinergy to give strenght to another human who is in a >>difficult moment >>joining this metta meditation. >>Thank you very much for your interest and consideration. >> >>Metta-Karuna >> >>Cybele >> 6259 From: m. nease Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 10:27am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity Dear Kom This sort of thing is why I value your posts so much. However, when I spoke of akusala it was with regard to liking (lobha) of that which conditions upekkhaa. To me that's the problem (or one of the problems) with cultivation of any of the brahma viharas--the pleasant feeling attending any of them can condition so much attachment retrospectively, to whatever conditioned them. Have I missed anything here? mike --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Mike, > > Indifferent feeling (Upekkha cetasika) can arise in > both wholesome and > unwholesome dhamma. > > Equanimity (tatra-majjhattata cetasika) can rise > *only* in wholesome > dhamma. Equanimity implies the co-arising > consciousness and mental > factors must be wholesome. > > Equanimity, just like any other dhamma, comes in > different strength. > Equanimity in dana results in a giving. Equanimity > in tranquil meditation > results eventually in Jhana. Equanimity in > satipatthana (as in a factor of > englightenment) results eventually in the 8-fold > paths. > > Equanimity in dana and equanimity in tranquil > meditation don't directly > result in the 8-fold path; otherwise, even people > without the teachings > of Buddha would become enlightened. > > Equanimity in dana and equanimity in tranquil > meditation, with the > concurrance of satipathana, probably support one > another (I have heard > TA Sujin mentioning a sutta that says any kusala > "contribute"). There > has been some discussions about this, although > without conclusion (in > my view). > > kom > 6260 From: ppp Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 3:01am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Hi, Joe: "Mind" or "Conciousness" is not well defined in the Theravada Buddhism, simply because from the Buddhist view point, there is no "mind" or "conciousness" which we can regard as an " entity". From the viewpoint of the Theravada Buddhism, each moment of experince is A mind, which may probably not last more than 10 or 15 milliseconds. Another mind will follow the previoius mind, experiencing either the same or different object (through the same or different door way). So, there is no mind or conciousness which can be located in one's body. In the stream of the moment-to-moment experiences, in fact, we cannot "find" not only mind/conciousness but a person who houses it. Since there is no mind which we can be defined as an entity in a conventional sense, the Theravada Buddhists do not get into the (Western) philosophical disuccion of the nature of mind/conciousness. tadao 6261 From: Jim Anderson Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 10:42am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Vakkali-Ray) Joe, >Very good. Can you translate the phrases? Meanwhile I work on it >myself. > >Thanks very much. > >Joe I think some of these phrases may be beyond my capability after having worked on them. The one I'm really stuck on is: "appati.t.thitakaara.naa ti attho." (SA i 184 pts) which I think is crucial to understanding the "unestablished". "owing to the cause of the unestablished" (tappurisa compound?) doesn't make much sense to me. -kaara.naa is the problem word which I take as the ablative sing. of kaara.na.m (cause). The Saddaniti explains this word as "attano phala.m karotii ti kaara.na.m" (it creates/makes its own fruit; perhaps better: it effects, produces, yields its own fruit). Do you or anyone else have any clue? Jim >--- "Jim Anderson" >wrote: >> Dear Joe, >> >> >Surely anyone with even an elementary knowledge of Pali can >discern >> >whether the proper translation in 'unestablished consciousness' >> >or 'consciousness unestablished'. Pali is very precise - almost as >> >precise as Sanskrit or Latin - in the attributive. >> > >> >Do you happen to know the exact Pali phrase? >> >> appati.t.t.hitena ca bhikkhave vi~n~naa.nena Vakkali kulaputto >parinibbuto >> ti. (S iii 124 pts) >> >> For further information: >> >> commentary: >> appati.t.t.hitenaa ti pa.tisandhivi~n~naa.nena appati.t.thitena. >> appati.t.thitakaara.naa ti attho. (SA i 184 pts) >> >> (with the re-linking or rebirth consciousness not re-established) >> >> subcommentary: >> appati.t.thitenaa ti patit.tha.m alabhantena. itthambhuutalakkha.ne >eta.m >> kara.navacana.m, anuppattidhammenaa ti attho. sati hi uppaade >pati.t.thita.m >> naama siyaa, a.t.thakathaaya.m pana yadeva tassa vi~n~naa.nassa >> appati.t.thaanakaara.na.m, tadeva parinibbaanakaara.nan ti vutta.m >> appati.t.thitakaara.naa ti. (SA.T i 218 cscd) >> >> Best wishes, >> Jim 6262 From: m. nease Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 11:12am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Vakkali-Ray) Jim & Joe, Glad to see some smart guys working on this--it's certainly over my head. mike --- Jim Anderson wrote: > >Very good. Can you translate the phrases? Meanwhile > I work on it > >myself. > > > >Thanks very much. > > > >Joe > > I think some of these phrases may be beyond my > capability after having > worked on them. The one I'm really stuck on is: > "appati.t.thitakaara.naa ti > attho." (SA i 184 pts) which I think is crucial to > understanding the > "unestablished". "owing to the cause of the > unestablished" (tappurisa > compound?) doesn't make much sense to me. -kaara.naa > is the problem word > which I take as the ablative sing. of kaara.na.m > (cause). The Saddaniti > explains this word as "attano phala.m karotii ti > kaara.na.m" (it > creates/makes its own fruit; perhaps better: it > effects, produces, yields > its own fruit). Do you or anyone else have any clue? 6263 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 11:19am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] was No Subject - now A Happy Married Life Christine, Craig Thanks, Christine, for posting the reference to this useful guide. Craig, I think by now you will see that there are no 'rules', but there is plently of guidance. Please feel free to come back with any specific queries you may have. In my view, the most valuable support a spouse can be for his/her partner is in encouraging the continued development of understanding (this of course does not mean that the conventional courtesies and standards should not also be observed). In this respect I am the most happily married man imaginable! Jon --- Christine wrote: > > Hi Craig, > > An interesting on-line book may be of some use to you: > > "A Happy Married Life" > by Ven. Sri K. Dhammananda > > http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha186.htm > > metta, > > Christine > --- "craig garner" wrote: > > Dear Sangha, could anybody please give me some clues to what kind > of rules a buddhist couple should follow? with refference to marriage > etc... I have read a bit hear and a bit there but it seems a little > confusing for me, at least maybe a few of you could point me in the > right dirrection it would be much appreciated. with metta Craig. > > 6264 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 11:19am Subject: Re: The meaning of Equanimity Dear Mike, --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Kom > > This sort of thing is why I value your posts so much. > However, when I spoke of akusala it was with regard to > liking (lobha) of that which conditions upekkhaa. To > me that's the problem (or one of the problems) with > cultivation of any of the brahma viharas--the pleasant > feeling attending any of them can condition so much > attachment retrospectively, to whatever conditioned > them. Have I missed anything here? > > mike I haven't seen you missing anything at all. I was just trying to add to the discussion that people sometimes confuse the different neutrality including: 1) Upekkha and Tatramajjhatta 2) Tatramajjhatta that arises with samatha, and Tatramajjhatta that arises with the satipatthana Here is a list of upekkah definition: (http://www.dhammastudy.com/paramat5.html): There are 10 kinds of upekkha (indifference), namely Chalagupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika which is indifferent to the 6 arammana of the arahanta, who has eradicated all kilesa. Brahmaviharupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika which is indifferent to all entities. Bojjhagupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika which is one of the components that make enlightenment possible. Viriyupekkha, the viriya-cetasika which is right perseverance which is not too tense nor too lax in the development of bhavana. Sankharupekkha, the panna-cetasika that is indifferent when the realization of the tilakkhana of the sankhara-dhamma. Vedanupekkha, the vedana-cetasika that does not feel unhappy or happy. Vipassanupekkha, the panna-cetasika that is neutral in the consideration of the arammana that arises from causes and conditions. Tatramajjhattatupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika that is neutral, not biased or partial. Jhanupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika in the jhana which attenuates the preoccupation by other dhamma which renders the peace less steadfast. This intends especially the tatiyajjhana (from the perspective of the 4 rupa-jhana), which has abandoned piti. Parisuddhupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika in the catutthajjhana (from the perspective of the 4 rupa-jhana), which is completely peaceful and cleansed from all adversaries, without any further function to abandon the elements of jhana. 6265 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 11:24am Subject: Experience or attitude? Dear group I forward this reply of mine from another list to share with you. >So much of Dharma is about attitude.... Dharma is about life not about attitude regarding my personal experience. You cannot learn Dhamma if we don't apply it in our daily efforts to get insights into reality. Dhamma is about the awareness of present moment and there is no knowledge of texts that can ever teach you this if you don't open yourself mind and heart to the practice. I have met walking in this so called spiritual path plenty of people using Dhamma to shield themselves from reality rather than develop mindfulness of the very same reality. To create new, gratifying identities and roles rather than dismiss the self and look honestly in the emptiness. Aspiration and study are excellent tools but if you don't dive in the ocean you don't learn how to swim. The books and the erudition are not going to keep you afloat. Dhamma is in the alchemy of daily life, is the fire of attention warming up our existence, transforming our minds, our hearts. True compassion is not an attitude: is giving yourself without fear and in wholeheartedness. Wisdom is not an uplifting concept, wisdom is skilfulness that you build up everyday, practicing, experiencing, living the Dhamma. Mindfulness is about having the courage to investigate reality, facing it without denial, accepting whatever comes. It is not simply an attitude, is DOING IT, is commiting yourself. Dhamma is not a philosophical choice, Dhamma is experiencing our life considering it at every moment, whatsoever you do. Living Dhamma is the only way to learn authentic Dhamma in my experience. Great discourses point the way but if you don't walk the path you cannot reach there. As William Blake would say 'life delights in life' and Dhamma delights in Dhamma...practice. :-) LOve Cybele 6266 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 1:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Tori --- Tori Korshak wrote: > Thank you for this, but I am puzzled. As well you might be! This is not an easy area to get a grasp of. As Kom mentions, there are at least 10 meanings of equanimity (these are given at Vis. IV, 156 ff.), but most commonly it is used in one of 3 ways— 1. Equanimity as indifferent or neutral feeling 2. Equanimity as one of the 4 ‘Divine Abidings’ (metta, karuna, mudita, upekkha) 3. Equanimity as one of the enlightenment factors (bojjhanga). As (1), it is the mental factor of feeling (vedana). Feeling can be either pleasant, unpleasant or neutral. By the way, while unpleasant feeling occurs only with unwholesome citta (moment of consciousness), neutral feeling, like pleasant feeling, can arise with both wholesome and unwholesome cittas. As (2) and (3), it is a mental factor in its own right (or, as some call it, an ethical quality). To confuse things even further, as a mental factor it is also known also known as tatra-majjhattataa, which literally means ‘neutrality towards’ or ‘keeping in the middle of things’. This mental factor of upekkha/tatra-majjhattataa arises with all wholesome cittas. It has the characteristic of effecting the balance of consciousness and the accompanying mental factors; the function of preventing excessiveness and deficiency, or inhibiting partiality (Vis. XIV, 153). These are its general characteristic and function. However, its specific characteristic and function varies slightly depending on the exact nature and degree of the kusala citta it accompanies. As (2) in particular, it is the mental factor that accompanies citta of the level of samatha (of a particular kind). As (3), it is the mental factor that accompanies citta at a moment of satipatthana. > If developing equanimity helps to > curb lobha and dosa (and it does in my experience), is that not an aid > to > knowing the true characteristic of a reality? If I am not blinded by my > own > clinging or aversions , are these realities not more likely to be seen > clearly? Why is it not an advantage to panna to abandon clinging and > develop equanimity? I think we have to be careful here. The so-called practice of developing equanimity may in fact not be kusala of any kind at all. If it stems from a desire to have less lobha and dosa (whether because of the belief that lobha and dosa are antithetical to the development of understanding or for any other reason), it is bound to be akusala. It is just an aspect of the desire for more kusala/understanding or less akusala. I am not saying this is so in your case, but I mention it because one often finds references which seem to suggest that this is part of the way of practice taught by the Buddha. The real issue that you raise is whether lobha and dosa are a hindrance to the development of understanding. The answer is, yes and no. It is said in the texts that the hindrances (lobha and dosa of various kinds) ‘weaken insight’, and that of course is true as regards the moment at which they arise, since all unwholesome cittas are rooted in moha. But there can in the moment(s) following the lobha or dosa, or even in between moments of sustained lobha or dosa, be awareness of the characteristic of those realities, so we should not be closed to the potential for moments of awareness at such times, no matter how strong the lobha or dosa. If we have the idea that awareness is possible only, or is much more likely to arise, when lobha and dosa have been curbed or reduced, this will be an obstacle to the development of awareness at moments whenever lobha or dosa are present (and for all such moments for the rest of this lifetime, because its not going to change any time soon!) - and this is probably most of the time if only we knew it. > … I wouldn't trust a monk for example who exhibited a > lot > of dosa to have panna. I’m not sure I want to comment on this! But the key thing to remember is the observation made by Robert, that the level of a person’s calmness (or lack of it) is no measure of his/her level of understanding. This is because the function of understanding is to understand the true characteristic of the reality that presents itself at the present moment, be it a nama or rupa, and nothing more than that, while a person’s level of calm at a given moment is a reflection of a number of things including his/her accumulated wholesomeness of various kinds (including samatha) or possibly even his/her attachment to the current object. Jon 6267 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 2:20pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Excellent post Tadao. robert p.s I think the speed of the falling away is even faster than you mention. --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Joe: > "Mind" or "Conciousness" is not well defined in the > Theravada Buddhism, simply because from the Buddhist view > point, there is no "mind" or "conciousness" which we can > regard as an " entity". From the viewpoint of the Theravada > Buddhism, each moment of experince is A mind, which may > probably not last more than 10 or 15 milliseconds. Another > mind will > follow the previoius mind, experiencing either the same > or different object (through the same or different door > way). So, there is no mind or conciousness which can be > located in one's body. In the stream of the moment-to-moment > experiences, in fact, we cannot "find" not only > mind/conciousness > but a person who houses it. > Since there is no mind which we can be defined as an entity in > a conventional sense, the Theravada Buddhists do not get into > the > (Western) philosophical disuccion of the nature of > mind/conciousness. > tadao > 6268 From: craig garner Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 2:14pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] was No Subject - now A Happy Married Life ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 12:41 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] was No Subject - now A Happy Married Life Hola Christina, thanks very much it looks really helpfull and detailed it will be very beneficial ! Thanks for your great help it is appreciated, with metta Craig > > Hi Craig, > > An interesting on-line book may be of some use to you: > > "A Happy Married Life" > by Ven. Sri K. Dhammananda > > http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha186.htm > > metta, > > Christine > --- "craig garner" wrote: > > Dear Sangha, could anybody please give me some clues to what kind > of rules a buddhist couple should follow? with refference to marriage > etc... I have read a bit hear and a bit there but it seems a little > confusing for me, at least maybe a few of you could point me in the > right dirrection it would be much appreciated. with metta Craig. > > > > 6269 From: craig garner Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 2:19pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] was No Subject - now A Happy Married Life Dear Jon, Thanks aswell and I agree in full , I just want to be as well informed because I have failed one marriage and in this new union want to do my best in all ways possible. mucho metta Craig ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 5:19 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] was No Subject - now A Happy Married Life > Christine, Craig > > Thanks, Christine, for posting the reference to this useful guide. > > Craig, I think by now you will see that there are no 'rules', but there is > plently of guidance. Please feel free to come back with any specific > queries you may have. > > In my view, the most valuable support a spouse can be for his/her partner > is in encouraging the continued development of understanding (this of > course does not mean that the conventional courtesies and standards should > not also be observed). In this respect I am the most happily married man > imaginable! > > Jon > > > --- Christine wrote: > > > Hi Craig, > > > > An interesting on-line book may be of some use to you: > > > > "A Happy Married Life" > > by Ven. Sri K. Dhammananda > > > > http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha186.htm > > > > metta, > > > > Christine > > --- "craig garner" wrote: > > > Dear Sangha, could anybody please give me some clues to what kind > > of rules a buddhist couple should follow? with refference to marriage > > etc... I have read a bit hear and a bit there but it seems a little > > confusing for me, at least maybe a few of you could point me in the > > right dirrection it would be much appreciated. with metta Craig. > > > > > > 6270 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 2:56pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear group Just a minor point which probably everyone knows. Equaminity (tatramajjhattata cetasika) arises with all kusala. (there can also be a feeling of calm and indifference with akusala but this is not equanimity in the true sense) True equanimity arises with all moments of satipatthana even if the object is unpleasant such as fear or anger. This is something we may see whenever there are genuine moments of insight as there must be detachment from self and thus a high level of equanimity (for that moment or moments). Even if one doesn't want to have equanimity it would be impossible to stop it arising because it is conditioned to arise at these moments. On the other hand if one thinks that equanimity comes first and later understanding then one will miss the present moment; rather than understanding the anattaness of whatever appears, learning to study the true uncontrollabilty of dhammas, there is likely to be a perhaps hidden effort to change the present object into whatever concept one has of calm or equanimity. As insight develops it is true that equanimity also develops but as jonothon and kom pointed out there are various types of equanimity. One might try to use equanimity as a measure of progress but be developing a kind of equanimity (kusala or akusala) that is not related to satipatthana. robert 6271 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 3:43pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Anders Thanks for your reply and comments below. I think the various posts to date have covered the main points. Just one aspect of your post I would like to comment on. You said- > Panna arises when one observes cause and effect. But it is quite > difficult > to observe it properly, if you are being dragged around by it, through > clinging. I would say that equanimity helps you cease clinging to it, in > order to observe it. The object of panna of the level of satipatthana/vipassana must be a reality appearing at that moment. I am not sure how the observance of cause and effect fits into this. What you are advocating, I think, is the 'have less clinging first, then you will have more panna' approach (which is usually expressed in terms of developing samatha rather than specifically equanimity). Would you not consider the clinging to be a possible possible object for panna? Jon --- Anders Honoré wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Jonothan Abbott > > Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 1:14 PM > Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity > > > > Anders > > > > Welcome to the list, and thanks for your voluminous contributions of > late. > > What a debut! > > Haha, thanks. It was actually my intention to just say hello, and then > fade > into the background for a while. Perhaps I'll fade later on... > > > As you are more familiar with the Mahayana teachings, I thought I > would > > give the Theravadin slant on the question of equanimity and the > > development of panna (as I understand the texts) in case there is any > > difference of substance. > > I think it's important not mistake the various categorisations as an > actual > exposition of truth. One needs to look into the causal factors that > these > create, rather than the labels and categories fit into, and from that > determine id its valid or not. > 6272 From: Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 3:48pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Experience or attitude? Contextual Reply Below: -----Original Message----- From: cybele chiodi Date: Friday, July 13, 2001 11:24 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Experience or attitude? > >Dear group > >I forward this reply of mine from another list to share with you. > >>So much of Dharma is about attitude.... > > >Dharma is about life not about attitude regarding my personal experience. Here is the danger of words. Attitude is denotationally a good word but connotationally, it loses meaning. The "attitude" Dhamma practitioners must take comes from a solid foundation of sila, samadhi, and panna (pragya) --- and these are inseparables. From that point, the Four Noble Truths with Emphasis on the Noble Eightfold Path as a practice is the correct posture. >You cannot learn Dhamma if we don't apply it in our daily efforts to get >insights into reality. Before we can learn the Dhamma via the application of it in the activities of daily living, something profound must happen. We must realize that stillness, silence, and solitude are not a waste of time or of life! >Dhamma is about the awareness of present moment and there is no knowledge of >texts that can ever teach you this if you don't open yourself mind and heart >to the practice. Exactly. The emphasis must be on the experiential and does not always get even verbally approximated when one tries to share the experience, but the effect can be observed in other non-verbal behaviors. This is transformation. The Dhamma is not merely about logic and "left-brained" activities but about the experience of being --- much of that experience is receptivity. >I have met walking in this so called spiritual path plenty of people using >Dhamma to shield themselves from reality rather than develop mindfulness of >the very same reality. When the Buddha said the whole world on is on fire, He meant it. The thing is people often think the practice is merely a "fire drill". But we also have to be careful not criticize and judge others about their practices. Reality is painful. Dhamma offers not mere relief but release from dukkha and owing to tanha, a beginner clings to notions of gratification and relief. >To create new, gratifying identities and roles rather than dismiss the self >and look honestly in the emptiness. Can you clarify this above point? What is gratifying? Constructing identities as mentioned above appears to promote the atta. The Dhamma has never asked us to dispense with the notion of a "conventional" self, yet the whole of the Sasana stands or falls on the Doctrine of Anatta. While this may seem paradoxical, it is not. The convention of using "self" to communicate is not diametrically opposed to the fact that there is no soul or abiding self or peronsality. It is the verbiage that gets in the way of the practice. >Aspiration and study are excellent tools but if you don't dive in the ocean >you don't learn how to swim. That is true but without aspiration and preparation, many are afraid to take the first plunge. This reminds me of when I learned to swim. I refused to take the risk of going into some deep water! I swam in the ocean and never feared the deep water but was terrified of 12 feet of depth at the swimming pool where I had a weekly swimming class! My teacher prepared me very well, but I would not jump in the water. He let this go on for about 2 weeks and one day pushed me in. I called him a number of nasty names and was angry for being pushed in the water, but I finally swam in the deep end of the pool, passed the test, and got out of the water to castigate him even more! Of course, it did not take long to understand that the teacher was wise and very experienced. >The books and the erudition are not going to keep you afloat. And they are not going to get us to the other shore either! Wet books get heavy, and erudition would be like arguing how to go about the arranging of the deck chairs on a second sinking Titanic! >Dhamma is in the alchemy of daily life, is the fire of attention warming up >our existence, transforming our minds, our hearts. I like the above! Alchemy is a packed word though! >True compassion is not an attitude: is giving yourself without fear and in >wholeheartedness. True compassion is not even a conventional "attitude" but a learned behavior that does allow us to take a "posture" and act rightly. But compassion often is limited to the "me" --- the ego is very much involved. "What most people mean by "compassion" is: please be nice to my ego. Well, your ego is your own worst enemy, and anybody being nice to it is not being compassionate to you." - Ken Wilber >Wisdom is not an uplifting concept, wisdom is skilfulness that you build up >everyday, practicing, experiencing, living the Dhamma. Wisdom is also the letting go which is far less stressful than the clinging and grasping to what is impermanent anyway. Grasping this Dhamma wisdom and trying to cling to it would be like trying to grasp a glass of water poured into an open hand that then closes trying to hold on to every last drop. The same goes for even moments of enlightened mind. >Mindfulness is about having the courage to investigate reality, facing it >without denial, accepting whatever comes. It take real courage to practice Dhamma --- it is >the< hardest work we will ever undertake and it is a life time of work to be undertaken. And vulnerability and facing the unknown is hardly negative but a positive stimulus that calls us to Right Understanding. >It is not simply an attitude, is DOING IT, is commiting yourself. It is a universal science of living and not merely philosophy and/or religion! >Dhamma is not a philosophical choice, Dhamma is experiencing our life >considering it at every moment, whatsoever you do. >Living Dhamma is the only way to learn authentic Dhamma in my experience. >Great discourses point the way but if you don't walk the path you cannot >reach there. >As William Blake would say 'life delights in life' and Dhamma delights in >Dhamma...practice. :-) > Experience or attitude? Perhaps a bit of both. Change "attitude" to "posture"! Dhamma is the "orientation" as well as the completion. May all of us reach the Ultimate Goal of the Dhamma. >LOve > >Cybele > With Metta, Bhante D. 6273 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 3:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Mike --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Jon, > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > According to the Pali texts, only panna can > > eradicate defilements and lead > > towards the end of the volitional cycle. The > > development of upekkha > > (equanimity) as one of the Brahma vihara (heavenly > > abidings) is an aspect > > of samatha and hence is a high level of kusala but > > in and of itself leads > > to continuation of the volitional cycle. With the > > development of high > > levels of samatha, it may seem that the kilesa are > > reduced, but in fact > > the latent tendencies are being suppressed rather > > than removed. > > Great post. I'm a great fan of equanimity too, > meaning that I very much like anything which > conditions it--a certain sign of akusala (the liking, > I mean). Yes, I know what you mean. In my case I think I like (a) the sense of keeping calm when I might otherwise react with lobha or dosa, and (b) the idea of being someone who is relatively less subject to the vagaries of pleasant and unpleasant feeling. None of this of course is kusala of any level! Jon I also think that everything in your post is > spot on in the context of satipatthana in everyday > life. > > > The development of panna is not contingent on, or > > particularly assisted > > by, developing equanimity. > > I guess it could be argued that upekkhaa contributes > to paññaa and to the eradication of defilements when > it is a feature of some of the advanced jhana states > which lead to nibbana by way of the jhanas. As I have > no experience of this and don't expect to, I don't > give it that much thought. Outside this (I think) > very unusual context, and certainly for the purposes > of most of our experience, I think your points are > very well made (for what my opinion's worth). > > mike 6274 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 4:39pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear group, Here is a section from Nina van Gorkoms book The Perfections leading to enlightenment. http://www.abhidhamma.org/perfections%20of%20enlightenment.htm Chapter 10 is about Equanimity THE PERFECTION OF EQUANIMITY Equanimity, upekkhã, is another perfection the Bodhisatta fulfilled. Upekkhá is in this case not neutral feeling but the sobhana cetasika which is tatra—majjhattata, evenmindedness or equanimity. The commentary to the Cariyapitaka 1) gives the following definition of equanimity: Equanimity has the characteristic of promoting the aspect of neutrality; its function is to see things impartially; its manifestation is the subsiding of attraction and repulsion; reflection upon the fact that all beings inherit the results of their own kamma is its proximate cause. The Bodhisatta developed the perfection of equanimity together with right understanding. Through equanimity he was imperturba­ble in the face of abusive speech and wrong done to him. He was impartial even to those who wished him well and he did not expect any reward. The same commentary 2) states that equanimity is indispensable to the practice of the other perfections. We read: For without equanimity, the aspirant cannot relinquish something without making false discriminations over gifts and recipients. When there is no equanimity, he cannot purify his virtue without always thinking about the obstacles to his life and to his vital needs. Equanimity perfects the power of renunciation for by its means he overcomes discontent and de­light. It perfects the functions of all the requisites (by enabling wisdom) to examine them according to their origin. When energy is aroused to excess because it hasn’t been exa­mined with equanimity, it cannot perform its proper function of striving. Forbearance and reflective acquiescence (the modes of patience) are possible only in one possessed of equa­nimity. Because of this quality, he does not speak deceptively about beings or formations. By looking upon the vicissitudes of worldly events with an equal mind, his determination to fulfil the practices he has undertaken becomes completely unshakable. And because he is unconcerned over the wrongs done by others, he perfects the abiding in lovingkindness. Thus equanimity is indispensable to the practice of all the other perfections. We need equanimity with the other perfections. While we are generous we should also be impartial. We should not think that we should only give to this person and not to that person. Equa­nimity helps us not to be disturbed when we lose dear people or when other people hurt or harm us. We can remember that whatever happens has to happen because it has been conditioned already. When we see others suffer and we cannot do anything for them, we can remember that we all are heirs to our own kamma, that we receive the results of our own deeds. Then there can be kusala citta with equanimity instead of aversion. When other people behave badly we can realize that there are no people, only akusala dhammas which appear and that these arise according to their conditions. Then we will be more tolerant, we will not say or think, “These people are terrible’ . There are accumulations of kusala dhammas and akusala dhammas which appear in our own and other people’s behaviour. We can learn to have equanimity towards our own akusala and kusala. Instead of being disturbed by our anger, there can be right understanding which realizes anger as a conditioned nãma, and at that moment the citta is kusala. Neither kusala nor akusala belongs to us. We know that the perfections have to be developed so that kusala can become ones nature, but we should not think of accumulating kusala for ourselves, there should not be clinging to “my kusala” . When kusala dhammas arise they are beneficial, they can condition the arising of kusala dhamma again in the future. The commentary states that because of equanimity towards the vicissitudes of life the Bodhisatta’s mind becomes completely unshakable in his determination to fulfil the practices he has undertaken. The vicissitudes of life are gain and loss, praise and blame, honour and dishonour, bodily ease and misery. These worldly conditions change all the time but one can face them with equanimity. If we really understand that the different si­tuations in our life are conditioned, that they are beyond con­trol, we do not prefer a particular situation to another one, we do not prefer anything else to the development of understanding of the present object. In that way the perfection of determi­nation can develop, it can eventually become unshakable. During our pilgrimage we were in many kinds of situations, some pleasant, some unpleasant. One of our friends fell on a piece of iron grill and wounded her knee so badly that it had to be stitched, but she remained calm. Another friend was robbed, she lost in the train to Bodhgaya her handbag with her money and her passport. She had aversion at first, but later on she rea­lized that one cannot change what has happened already. She said that if she would think of it again and again it would only cause her more unpleasantness. We also had many pleasant expe­riences. It was a happy occasion to be in the holy places where we could recollect the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha. At times there was dana all around me. One of the last evenings in Delhi there were in front of me friends making an offering to the monks, and while I looked backwards I saw the leader of our group making a speech to the drivers in order to thank them and offering them the money we all had collected for them. Whatever situation occurs, be it pleasant or unpleasant, it is conditioned. During our journey we were often reminded, “This is a new situation and it is conditioned”. This helped me not to try to control things when the situation was not as I wanted it to be. Khun Sujin said: A new situation can be a condition for the development of satipatthana. One should be ready to accept many kinds of situations. Gain and loss. No lobha when there is gain, not too much dosa when there is loss. Each moment is in itself another situation. Awareness can arise at any time. Then there is no clinging to another situation or another object, there is no selection of objects. Khun Sujin also said that right understanding should be devel­oped in order to see that all realities are the same in the sense that they cannot stay, that they arise and fall away. In that way there will be less clinging to them. I was inclined to think that one can only learn about realities in situations when there are Dhamma discussions, and I was clinging to such situa— tions. During this journey I came to understand more that, if we do not cling to particular situations and we can see them as only nãma and rupa which are conditioned, we can learn from any kind of situation. We can learn that there are nãma and rupa while we are in different places such as the Thai Embassy, while we are walking in the park or having lunch with friends and eating delicious food. If we see each moment as a completely new situation which is conditioned we can be reminded to be aware of the present mo­ment, without planning or selecting objects, without thinking of the future. Näma and rupa arise because of their own conditions and we never know what kind of reality will arise next, we can­not plan anything. If we really understand this we will not be distracted from our goal, that is, the development of under­standing of this moment. Out of compassion the Bodhisatta developed all the perfections for innumerable lives. He aspired to help other beings to attain enlightenment as well. The commentary to the Cariyapitaka 1) states that each perfection is accompanied by compassion and skilful means. The same commentary 2) explains that “skilful means” is the wisdom which makes the noble qualities of the Bodhisatta into requisites of enlightenment. When he developed these virtues he always had in mind the attainment of Buddhahood for the sake of other beings. The “great aspiration” to help other beings to attain the goal is the condition for all the perfections without exception, the same commentary states. We read about the “Great Compassion” of the Buddha in the “Path of Discrimination” (Patisambhidàmagga, Part I, Ch 71). First all the dangers and disadvantages of the cycle of birth and death which are seen by the Buddhas are summed up, such as: Worldly life moves on. Worldly life is on the wrong road... The world has no lastingness and is 1ed on. The world has no shelter and no protector. The world has nothing of its own, it has to leave all and pass on. The world is incomplete, insatiate, and the slave of craving. Worldly life is without shelter. Worldly life is without shield. Worldly life is without refuge... Worldly life is no refuge... The world is agitated and disturbed... Worldly life is wounded by darts, pierced by many darts; there is none other than myself to draw out the darts... We then read about numerous other disadvantages of Worldly life. Only a Buddha can by his omniscience fully see the extent of the danger of being in the cycle of birth and death. This arouses his compassion so that he is determined to help other beings to attain freedom from the cycle. Further on we read: Upon the Enlightened Ones, the Blessed Ones, who see thus, “I have crossed over and the world has not crossed over; I am liberated and the world is not liberated; I am controlled and the world is uncontrolled; I am at peace and the world is not at peace; I am comforted and the world is comfortless; I am extinguished and the world is unextinguished; I, having cros­sed over, can bring across; I, being liberated, can liberate; I, being controlled, can teach control; I, being at peace, can pacify; I, being comforted, can comfort; I, being extin­guished, can teach extinguishment,” there descends the Great Compassion. This is the Perfect Ones knowledge of the attainment of the Great Compassion. he compassion of a Buddha cannot be fathomed by ordinary people, it is unequalled. Out of compassion the Buddha taught people the development of right understanding in daily life. The ultimate goal cannot be reached in one life, but even when right understanding just be­gins to develop we come to know things we did not know before. We discover many defilements and also learn to know the more subtle ones. Instead of being distressed about them there can be gratefulness to the Buddha who taught us the wisdom which can eradicate them. When we come to realize our defilements we may remember at once that this is due to the Buddha’s teachings and then there can be recollection of the qualities of the Buddha (Buddhanussati). Also a moment of gratefulness to the Buddha is a conditioned moment and it can be object of mindfulness so that it can be known as not self. We read in the “Discourse on the Simile of the Cloth”(Middle Length Sayings I, no. 7) that the Buddha speaks about the defilements of the mind which are: greed, covetousness, male­volence, anger, malice, hypocrisy, spite, envy, stinginess, deceit, treachery, obstinacy, impetuosity, arrogance, pride, conceit and indolence. When the monk knows them as they are he can get rid of them. The text states: .When, monks, the monk thinks that greed and covetousness is a defilement of the mind.. .that indolence is a defilement of the mind, and having known it thus, the defilement of the mind that is indolence is got rid of, he becomes possessed of unwa­vering confidence in the Awakened One and thinks: “Thus indeed is he the Lord, perfected, wholly self—awakened, endowed with knowledge and right conduct, well—farer, knower of the worlds, incomparable charioteer of men to be tamed, teacher of devas and mankind, the Awakened One, the Lord.” we read that some people attained arahatship by making the Recollection of the Buddha their object of meditation, but they could not attain it without developing satipatthãna in daily life. We read in the “Gradual Sayings” (Book of the Sixes, Ch III, par. 5) that the Buddha spoke to the monks about six recollections, six states of everminding. We read about the first one: Herein, monks, the ariyan disciple ever minds the Tathãgata: “He is the Exalted One.. .“ Monks, what time the ariyan dis­ciple minds the Tathagata, his heart is not lust—obsessed, nor hate—obsessed, nor obsessed by infatuation; upright in heart is he at that time, moved free, raised from greed; and this greed, monks, is a name for the fivefold sensuous pleasures. Verily, monks, by making this thought their object, some men thereby are purged. Ariyans have an unwavering confidence in the Buddha, because they have discovered the reason why the Buddha had become en­lightened: he had developed all the perfections and he had, through right understanding, realized the true nature of all realities appearing at the present moment. The ariyans proved for themselves that by following the Path the Buddha taught they could reach the goal. We may say that the perfections must be developed together with right understanding, in our daily life, but are we doers of the teachings? We need to develop all the perfections, and if one of them is lacking we cannot reach the goal. Whenever there is an opportunity for generosity we should use it in order to be less selfish. We need to develop sila, wholesomeness in action and speech, without an idea of self who could suppress akusala. We should remember that in sila is also included mindfulness of whatever appears through the six doors. We need the perfection of renunciation, renunciation from selfish clinging to sense pleasures. We should remember that all kusala dhammas are renun­ciation. We need to develop the perfection of wisdom, comprising wisdom of different levels: understanding based on listening and considering and direct understanding of realities. We need the perfection of energy so that we will not become discouraged but continue on the way, no matter what will happen. We need the perfection of patience, especially when we are in difficult situations or when other people are disagreeable to us. We should regard such circumstances as a test, an opportunity to accumu­late patience. We need truthfulness to investigate all realities of our daily life, our defilements included. The perfection of truthfulness is the sincere inclination to follow the way lead­ing to the eradication of defilements. We need determination to develop all the perfections so that eventually enlightenment can be attained. We need the perfection of mettã, so that we think more of the welfare of other people and cling less to the impor­tance of self. We need the perfection of equanimity to face the worldly conditions without being disturbed by them. Satipatthana should be developed together with all the perfections. This will help us to reduce the clinging to an idea of self who has to de­velop the perfections. All the perfections support the growth of right understanding so that it can eventually perform the function of detachment from all conditioned realities. ---------------------------------------- 6275 From: Christine Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 5:17pm Subject: Can we help advance Other Sentient Beings? Dear All, I subscribe to a number of mailing groups where discussions regarding sentience occasionally arise. (Currently one group is expressing views about vegetables and plants being different gradations of sentience.) Sometimes, the discussion gets bogged down in vegetarianism vs. meat eating, and how many sentient beings are harmed with either form of food production. That is not what I would like your thoughts on..... My question is "Is there any way that I can help a non-human sentient being towards (sooner than otherwise) having a better rebirth? If the scriptures don't rule it in, do they rule it out?" I have a companion animal - Rusty the Dhamma Dog. He is a Great Dane/Alsatian cross-breed, and came to us as a stray (just for one night, then if we don't find the owner, he goes to the pound, O.K.? Yes, Mum) seven years ago. But I have noticed that when I am listening to the chant of The Brahma Viharas on Vipassana.com audio files, he comes into the house, into the Study and puts his head on my lap and seems affected in some way. He is an 'outside dog' and never comes into a carpeted area at any other time. This has only started over the last three months. He is not affected otherwise by T.V., radio or CDs. On another list in a discussion ranging over Impermanence and Anatta, the idea that some beings have memories carried over from a past life was raised. Is it possible that hearing the cadence of chants could be helpful in some way to him, even though he doesn't process the language? What about seeing statues of the Buddha? Do those living in Monasteries where animals often are left have any ideas about this? Are there any folk beliefs even in Buddhist countries about this? Buddhists do really believe that any of us could often have a rebirth as a non-human being, don't we? So I am sure others have wondered about this before...... Regards, Christine (slightly embarrassed, and slightly garbled.) 6276 From: Herman Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 6:11pm Subject: Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Anders, In view of the fact that we are dealing with your understanding of ignorance only, it would be appropriate that you describe what you understand ignorance to be. Try to not refer to the scriptures. Use your own experience. In view of the fact that I attended a gymnasium in Holland, I find it hard to believe that you, who attends a gymnasium in Denmark, does not possess a dictionary in which the term "locus" is defined. However, this link should help you. http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary A helpful hint, your question was: Where did ignorance arise? Still play any role playing games? Kind Regards Herman --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <180015253121038031172218004036129208> > Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 5:52 AM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! > > > >Anders, > >I have just one or two questions in relation to your simple question. > >Is your question based on your own understanding only? > > Pretty much, yes. > > >Why do you presuppose that there is a locus for ignorance? > > 'locus'.... No mention of it in my dictionary. Would you care to define that > word for me? 6277 From: Tori Korshak Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 6:37pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Robert, Thank you! Can you give an example of being aware of upekkha arising in your own life? Metta, Victoria At 11:56 PM 7/13/01 -0700, you wrote: >Dear group >Just a minor point which probably everyone knows. Equaminity >(tatramajjhattata cetasika) arises with all kusala. (there can >also be a feeling of calm and indifference with akusala but this >is not equanimity in the true sense) > >True equanimity arises with all moments of satipatthana even if >the object is unpleasant such as fear or anger. This is >something we may see whenever there are genuine moments of >insight as there must be detachment from self and thus a high >level of equanimity (for that moment or moments). Even if one >doesn't want to have equanimity it would be impossible to stop >it arising because it is conditioned to arise at these moments. >On the other hand if one thinks that equanimity comes first and >later understanding then one will miss the present moment; >rather than understanding the anattaness of whatever appears, >learning to study the true uncontrollabilty of dhammas, there is >likely to be a perhaps hidden effort to change the present >object into whatever concept one has of calm or equanimity. > >As insight develops it is true that equanimity also develops but >as jonothon and kom pointed out there are various types of >equanimity. One might try to use equanimity as a measure of >progress but be developing a kind of equanimity (kusala or >akusala) that is not related to satipatthana. >robert > > > 6278 From: Tori Korshak Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 6:40pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity At 01:42 PM 7/14/01 +0800, you wrote: Dear Jon, Thank you very much for your informative reply. Where does the practitioner go from here? It is a bit discouraging to think one can't cultivate uppekha because it might be akusala. Is it also true that one could display gross dosa and still be experiencing uppekha? I would be unconvinced. Many thanks. Metta, Victoria >I'm not sure I want to comment on this! But the key thing to remember is >the observation made by Robert, that the level of a person's calmness (or >lack of it) is no measure of his/her level of understanding. This is >because the function of understanding is to understand the true >characteristic of the reality that presents itself at the present moment, >be it a nama or rupa, and nothing more than that, while a person's level >of calm at a given moment is a reflection of a number of things including >his/her accumulated wholesomeness of various kinds (including samatha) or >possibly even his/her attachment to the current object. > >Jon > 6279 From: Herman Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 7:08pm Subject: Re: The meaning of Equanimity Dear Robert, Thank you for this. It explains much. It leads me to this question. I understand that this question may be seen as being provocative, but I do not have this intention. I am not so much concerned with the moral overtones that my question could generate. My question is, and I ask it completely without bias, does the the self-immolation of Thich Quang Duc, June 11, 1963, in Saigon, Vietnam bear witness to the equanimity described in the source you quote? My feeling is that it does, but I want to test this. I don't expect you to know this monks state of mind when this event occured, but from all accounts the man mentally prepared for this event weeks before, sat down in the square, was doused with petrol by his associates and set on fire. He died , from what was visible, in complete tranquility. Only a few months later, the Catholic based government, which had set about to subtly repress Buddhism, and which had not altered it's intended course despite months of intensive lobbying from Buddhist quarters , including Thich Quang Duc, was overthrown. Thank you Robert and anyone else for your considered input. Herman --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > > Dear group, > Here is a section from Nina van Gorkoms book The Perfections > leading to enlightenment. > http://www.abhidhamma.org/perfections%20of%20enlightenment.htm > Chapter 10 is about Equanimity > > > THE PERFECTION OF EQUANIMITY > Equanimity, upekkhã, is another perfection the Bodhisatta > fulfilled. Upekkhá is in this case not neutral feeling but the > sobhana cetasika which is tatra—majjhattata, evenmindedness or > equanimity. The commentary to the Cariyapitaka 1) gives the > following definition of equanimity: > > Equanimity has the characteristic of promoting the aspect of > neutrality; its function is to see things impartially; its > manifestation is the subsiding of attraction and repulsion; > reflection upon the fact that all beings inherit the results of > their own kamma is its proximate cause. > > The Bodhisatta developed the perfection of equanimity together > with right understanding. Through equanimity he was > imperturba­ble in the face of abusive speech and wrong done to > him. He was impartial even to those who wished him well and he > did not expect any reward. > > The same commentary 2) states that equanimity is indispensable > to the practice of the other perfections. We read: > > For without equanimity, the aspirant cannot relinquish something > without making false discriminations over gifts and recipients. > When there is no equanimity, he cannot purify his virtue without > always thinking about the obstacles to his life and to his vital > needs. Equanimity perfects the power of renunciation for by its > means he overcomes discontent and de­light. It perfects the > functions of all the requisites (by enabling wisdom) to examine > them according to their origin. When energy is aroused to excess > because it hasn't been exa­mined with equanimity, it cannot > perform its proper function of striving. Forbearance and > reflective acquiescence (the modes of patience) are possible > only in one possessed of equa­nimity. Because of this quality, > he does not speak deceptively about beings or formations. By > looking upon the vicissitudes of worldly events with an equal > mind, his determination to fulfil the practices he has > undertaken becomes completely unshakable. And because he is > unconcerned over the wrongs done by others, he perfects the > abiding in lovingkindness. Thus equanimity is indispensable to > the practice of all the other perfections. > > We need equanimity with the other perfections. While we are > generous we should also be impartial. We should not think that > we should only give to this person and not to that person. > Equa­nimity helps us not to be disturbed when we lose dear > people or when other people hurt or harm us. We can remember > that whatever happens has to happen because it has been > conditioned already. When we see others suffer and we cannot do > anything for them, we can remember that we all are heirs to our > own kamma, that we receive the results of our own deeds. Then > there can be kusala citta with equanimity instead of aversion. > When other people > behave badly we can realize that there are no people, only > akusala dhammas which appear and that these arise according to > their conditions. Then we will be more tolerant, we will not say > or think, "These people are terrible' . There are accumulations > of kusala dhammas and akusala dhammas which appear in our own > and other people's behaviour. We can learn to have equanimity > towards our own akusala and kusala. Instead of being disturbed > by our anger, there can be right understanding which realizes > anger as a conditioned nãma, and at that moment the citta is > kusala. Neither kusala nor akusala belongs to us. We know that > the perfections have to be developed so that kusala can become > ones nature, but we should not think of accumulating kusala for > ourselves, there should not be clinging to "my kusala" . When > kusala dhammas arise they are beneficial, they can condition the > arising of kusala dhamma again in the future. > > The commentary states that because of equanimity towards the > vicissitudes of life the Bodhisatta's mind becomes completely > unshakable in his determination to fulfil the practices he has > undertaken. The vicissitudes of life are gain and loss, praise > and blame, honour and dishonour, bodily ease and misery. These > worldly conditions change all the time but one can face them > with equanimity. If we really understand that the different > si­tuations in our life are conditioned, that they are beyond > con­trol, we do not prefer a particular situation to another > one, we do not prefer anything else to the development of > understanding of the present object. In that way the perfection > of determi­nation can develop, it can eventually become > unshakable. > > During our pilgrimage we were in many kinds of situations, some > pleasant, some unpleasant. One of our friends fell on a piece of > iron grill and wounded her knee so badly that it had to be > stitched, but she remained calm. Another friend was robbed, she > lost in the train to Bodhgaya her handbag with her money and her > passport. She had aversion at first, but later on she rea­lized > that one cannot change what has happened already. She said that > if she would think of it again and again it would only cause her > more unpleasantness. We also had many pleasant expe­riences. It > was a happy occasion to be in the holy places where we could > recollect the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha. At times there > was dana all around me. One of the last evenings in Delhi there > were in front of me friends making an offering to the monks, and > while I looked backwards I saw the leader of our group making a > speech to the drivers in order to thank them and offering them > the money we all had collected for them. > > Whatever situation occurs, be it pleasant or unpleasant, it is > conditioned. During our journey we were often reminded, "This is > a new situation and it is conditioned". This helped me not to > try to control things when the situation was not as I wanted it > to be. Khun Sujin said: > > A new situation can be a condition for the development of > satipatthana. One should be ready to accept many kinds of > situations. Gain and loss. No lobha when there is gain, not too > much dosa when there is loss. Each moment is in itself another > situation. Awareness can arise at any time. Then there is no > clinging to another situation or another object, there is no > selection of objects. > > Khun Sujin also said that right understanding should be > devel­oped in order to see that all realities are the same in > the sense that they cannot stay, that they arise and fall away. > In that way there will be less clinging to them. I was inclined > to think that one can only learn about realities in situations > when there are Dhamma discussions, and I was clinging to such > situa— tions. During this journey I came to understand more > that, if we do not cling to particular situations and we can see > them as only nãma and rupa which are conditioned, we can learn > from any kind of situation. We can learn that there are nãma and > rupa while we are in different places such as the Thai Embassy, > while we are walking in the park or having lunch with friends > and eating delicious food. > > If we see each moment as a completely new situation which is > conditioned we can be reminded to be aware of the present > mo­ment, without planning or selecting objects, without thinking > of the future. Näma and rupa arise because of their own > conditions and we never know what kind of reality will arise > next, we can­not plan anything. If we really understand this we > will not be distracted from our goal, that is, the development > of under­standing of this moment. > > Out of compassion the Bodhisatta developed all the perfections > for innumerable lives. He aspired to help other beings to attain > enlightenment as well. The commentary to the Cariyapitaka 1) > states that each perfection is accompanied by compassion and > skilful means. The same commentary 2) explains that "skilful > means" is the wisdom which makes the noble qualities of the > Bodhisatta into requisites of enlightenment. When he developed > these virtues he always had in mind the attainment of Buddhahood > for the sake of other beings. The "great aspiration" to help > other beings to attain the goal is the condition for all the > perfections without exception, the same commentary states. > > We read about the "Great Compassion" of the Buddha in the "Path > of Discrimination" (Patisambhidàmagga, Part I, Ch 71). First all > the dangers and disadvantages of the cycle of birth and death > which are seen by the Buddhas are summed up, such as: > > Worldly life moves on. > > Worldly life is on the wrong road... > > The world has no lastingness and is 1ed on. > > The world has no shelter and no protector. > > The world has nothing of its own, it has to leave all and > > pass on. > > The world is incomplete, insatiate, and the slave of > > craving. > > Worldly life is without shelter. > > Worldly life is without shield. > > Worldly life is without refuge... > > Worldly life is no refuge... > > The world is agitated and disturbed... > > Worldly life is wounded by darts, pierced by many darts; > > there is none other than myself to draw out the darts... > > > > We then read about numerous other disadvantages of Worldly > life. Only a Buddha can by his omniscience fully see the extent > of the danger of being in the cycle of birth and death. This > arouses his compassion so that he is determined to help other > beings to attain freedom from the cycle. Further on we read: > > Upon the Enlightened Ones, the Blessed Ones, who see thus, "I > have crossed over and the world has not crossed over; I am > liberated and the world is not liberated; I am controlled and > the world is uncontrolled; I am at peace and the world is not at > peace; I am comforted and the world is comfortless; I am > extinguished and the world is unextinguished; I, having cros­sed > over, can bring across; I, being liberated, can liberate; I, > being controlled, can teach control; I, being at peace, can > pacify; I, being comforted, can comfort; I, being extin­guished, > can teach extinguishment," there descends the Great Compassion. > > This is the Perfect Ones knowledge of the attainment of the > Great Compassion. > > he compassion of a Buddha cannot be fathomed by ordinary > people, it is unequalled. > > Out of compassion the Buddha taught people the development of > right understanding in daily life. The ultimate goal cannot be > reached in one life, but even when right understanding just > be­gins to develop we come to know things we did not know > before. We discover many defilements and also learn to know the > more subtle ones. Instead of being distressed about them there > can be gratefulness to the Buddha who taught us the wisdom which > can eradicate them. When we come to realize our defilements we > may remember at once that this is due to the Buddha's teachings > and then there can be recollection of the qualities of the > Buddha (Buddhanussati). Also a moment of gratefulness to the > Buddha is a conditioned moment and it can be object of > mindfulness so that it can be known as not self. > > We read in the "Discourse on the Simile of the Cloth"(Middle > Length Sayings I, no. 7) that the Buddha speaks about the > defilements of the mind which are: greed, covetousness, > male­volence, anger, malice, hypocrisy, spite, envy, stinginess, > deceit, treachery, obstinacy, impetuosity, arrogance, pride, > conceit and indolence. When the monk knows them as they are he > can get rid of them. The text states: > > > > .When, monks, the monk thinks that greed and covetousness is a > defilement of the mind.. .that indolence is a defilement of the > mind, and having known it thus, the defilement of the mind that > is indolence is got rid of, he becomes possessed of unwa­vering > confidence in the Awakened One and thinks: "Thus indeed is he > the Lord, perfected, wholly self—awakened, endowed with > knowledge and right conduct, well—farer, knower of the worlds, > incomparable charioteer of men to be tamed, teacher of devas and > mankind, the Awakened One, the Lord." > > we read that some people attained arahatship by making the > Recollection of the Buddha their object of meditation, but they > could not attain it without developing satipatthãna in daily > life. > > We read in the "Gradual Sayings" (Book of the Sixes, Ch III, > par. 5) that the Buddha spoke to the monks about six > recollections, six states of everminding. We read about the > first one: > > Herein, monks, the ariyan disciple ever minds the Tathãgata: > > "He is the Exalted One.. ." Monks, what time the ariyan > dis­ciple minds the Tathagata, his heart is not lust—obsessed, > nor hate—obsessed, nor obsessed by infatuation; upright in heart > is he at that time, moved free, raised from greed; and this > greed, monks, is a name for the fivefold sensuous pleasures. > Verily, monks, by making this thought their object, some men > thereby are purged. > > Ariyans have an unwavering confidence in the Buddha, because > they have discovered the reason why the Buddha had become > en­lightened: he had developed all the perfections and he had, > through right understanding, realized the true nature of all > realities appearing at the present moment. The ariyans proved > for themselves that by following the Path the Buddha taught they > could reach the goal. > > We may say that the perfections must be developed together with > right understanding, in our daily life, but are we doers of the > teachings? We need to develop all the perfections, and if one of > them is lacking we cannot reach the goal. Whenever there is an > opportunity for generosity we should use it in order to be less > selfish. We need to develop sila, wholesomeness in action and > speech, without an idea of self who could suppress akusala. We > should remember that in sila is also included mindfulness of > whatever appears through the six doors. We need the perfection > of renunciation, renunciation from selfish clinging to sense > pleasures. We should remember that all kusala dhammas are > renun­ciation. We need to develop the perfection of wisdom, > comprising wisdom of different levels: understanding based on > listening and considering and direct understanding of realities. > We need the perfection of energy so that we will not become > discouraged but continue on the way, no matter what will happen. > We need the perfection of patience, especially when we are in > difficult situations or when other people are disagreeable to > us. We should regard such circumstances as a test, an > opportunity to accumu­late patience. We need truthfulness to > investigate all realities of our daily life, our defilements > included. The perfection of truthfulness is the sincere > inclination to follow the way lead­ing to the eradication of > defilements. We need determination to develop all the > perfections so that eventually enlightenment can be attained. We > need the perfection of mettã, so that we think more of the > welfare of other people and cling less to the impor­tance of > self. We need the perfection of equanimity to face the worldly > conditions without being disturbed by them. Satipatthana should > be developed together with all the perfections. This will help > us to reduce the clinging to an idea of self who has to de­velop > the perfections. All the perfections support the growth of right > understanding so that it can eventually perform the function of > detachment from all conditioned realities. > ---------------------------------------- > 6280 From: Herman Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 7:35pm Subject: Re: (Vakkali-Ray) Hi all, Can't someone translate the Tipitaka into Latin? Then at least I could verify the translations :-) Just as an aside, these days we all hear the difference between New York English, Californian English, English English, South African English, New Zealand English, Australian English, Hong Kong English, Indian English etc. All these Englishes have one taste, but nobody knows what it's root sounded like. Metta Herman --- "m. nease" wrote: > Jim & Joe, > > Glad to see some smart guys working on this--it's > certainly over my head. > > mike > > --- Jim Anderson wrote: > > > >Very good. Can you translate the phrases? Meanwhile > > I work on it > > >myself. > > > > > >Thanks very much. > > > > > >Joe > > > > I think some of these phrases may be beyond my > > capability after having > > worked on them. The one I'm really stuck on is: > > "appati.t.thitakaara.naa ti > > attho." (SA i 184 pts) which I think is crucial to > > understanding the > > "unestablished". "owing to the cause of the > > unestablished" (tappurisa > > compound?) doesn't make much sense to me. -kaara.naa > > is the problem word > > which I take as the ablative sing. of kaara.na.m > > (cause). The Saddaniti > > explains this word as "attano phala.m karotii ti > > kaara.na.m" (it > > creates/makes its own fruit; perhaps better: it > > effects, produces, yields > > its own fruit). Do you or anyone else have any clue? > > 6281 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 8:36pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Vakkali-Ray) Dear Herman, If you know latin - especially the grammar- you have a good basis for learning pali as the pali grammar books in English seem to be written by scholars with a background in latin. I don't any latin and have a big problem figuring out what they mean by substantive and nominative etc. Pali is an inflected language like latin. The world sure needs more people who know Pali... robert --- Herman wrote: > Hi all, > > Can't someone translate the Tipitaka into Latin? Then at least > I > could verify the translations :-) > > Just as an aside, these days we all hear the difference > between New > York English, Californian English, English English, South > African > English, New Zealand English, Australian English, Hong Kong > English, > Indian English etc. > > All these Englishes have one taste, but nobody knows what it's > root > sounded like. > > > Metta > > Herman > > > > --- "m. nease" wrote: > > Jim & Joe, > > > > Glad to see some smart guys working on this--it's > > certainly over my head. > > > > mike > > > > --- Jim Anderson wrote: > > > > > >Very good. Can you translate the phrases? Meanwhile > > > I work on it > > > >myself. > > > > > > > >Thanks very much. > > > > > > > >Joe > > > > > > I think some of these phrases may be beyond my > > > capability after having > > > worked on them. The one I'm really stuck on is: > > > "appati.t.thitakaara.naa ti > > > attho." (SA i 184 pts) which I think is crucial to > > > understanding the > > > "unestablished". "owing to the cause of the > > > unestablished" (tappurisa > > > compound?) doesn't make much sense to me. -kaara.naa > > > is the problem word > > > which I take as the ablative sing. of kaara.na.m > > > (cause). The Saddaniti > > > explains this word as "attano phala.m karotii ti > > > kaara.na.m" (it > > > creates/makes its own fruit; perhaps better: it > > > effects, produces, yields > > > its own fruit). Do you or anyone else have any clue? > 6282 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 9:05pm Subject: Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! LOCUS Dear Herman Sorry if I interfere but apart the fact that I tried to access your link and couldn't, I find that you are a bit 'over the top' with Anders now. All that mumbo jumbo about gymnasium is quite strained to fits the subject. However as my Latin is a lot better than my Pali I translate 'locus'. LOCUS: It's a technical term meaning a particular position, point, or place. From the Latin 'place'. In mathematics is a curve or other figure formed by all the points satisfying a particular condition. Hope this clarifies. Metta CYbele >From: Herman >Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! >Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 10:11:37 -0000 > >Anders, > >In view of the fact that we are dealing with your understanding of >ignorance only, it would be appropriate that you describe what you >understand ignorance to be. Try to not refer to the scriptures. Use >your own experience. > >In view of the fact that I attended a gymnasium in Holland, I find it >hard to believe that you, who attends a gymnasium in Denmark, does >not possess a dictionary in which the term "locus" is defined. >However, this link should help you. > >http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary > >A helpful hint, your question was: Where did ignorance arise? > >Still play any role playing games? > >Kind Regards > > >Herman > 6283 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 9:08pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Tori, Is that a challenge! I guess there is more equanimity in my life than before but I don't like to admit it! (well actually I do, but that is conceit). I might start thinking I really know something based on this unreliable indicator. basically because there is more insight into anatta and conditions, albeit mostly at an elementary level, this makes life so much easier to understand. Even just because it is habitual for me to think of kamma and vipaka - cause and effect- whenever something untoward happens it is natural that reflection about kamma arises. And that type of reflection always comes with equanimity. Really the whole of the Buddha's teachings condition equanimity - the more we understand them the more this factor is developed. However, by conditions, until one is very advanced a coincidence of causes may come about where strong anger or fear arise. Did you read the examples I gave of the sotapannas who were distressed and crying after the death of their relations? robert --- Tori Korshak wrote: > > Dear Robert, > Thank you! Can you give an example of being aware of upekkha > arising in > your own life? > > Metta, > Victoria > > > At 11:56 PM 7/13/01 -0700, you wrote: > >Dear group > >Just a minor point which probably everyone knows. Equaminity > >(tatramajjhattata cetasika) arises with all kusala. (there > can > >also be a feeling of calm and indifference with akusala but > this > >is not equanimity in the true sense) > > > >True equanimity arises with all moments of satipatthana even > if > >the object is unpleasant such as fear or anger. This is > >something we may see whenever there are genuine moments of > >insight as there must be detachment from self and thus a high > >level of equanimity (for that moment or moments). Even if one > >doesn't want to have equanimity it would be impossible to > stop > >it arising because it is conditioned to arise at these > moments. > >On the other hand if one thinks that equanimity comes first > and > >later understanding then one will miss the present moment; > >rather than understanding the anattaness of whatever appears, > >learning to study the true uncontrollabilty of dhammas, there > is > >likely to be a perhaps hidden effort to change the present > >object into whatever concept one has of calm or equanimity. > > > >As insight develops it is true that equanimity also develops > but > >as jonothon and kom pointed out there are various types of > >equanimity. One might try to use equanimity as a measure of > >progress but be developing a kind of equanimity (kusala or > >akusala) that is not related to satipatthana. > >robert > > > 6284 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 9:09pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Tori Dear Robert >> >Dear Robert, >Thank you! Can you give an example of being aware of upekkha arising in >your own life? > >Metta, >Victoria I loved it Tori!!! After the long, detailed academic exposition of Robert you asked him the very core of the meaning of equanimity - experience! Very tricky. Robert your 'disciples' are revolting against you! ;-)))) Metta Cybele 6285 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 9:28pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Can we help advance Other Sentient Beings? Dear Christine >Do those living in Monasteries where animals often are left have any >ideas about this? Are there any folk beliefs even in Buddhist >countries about this? From what I have observed in Southeast Asia, the monks don't care even for the material condition of this animals, you can guess the spiritual one. There are plenty od stray dogs and cats that find 'hospitality' in the monasteries and normally thay are not rejected or ill treated but if there is laypeople to feed them ok, if not they starve all the same but most they have many diseases that go on not cured and they suffer a lot. In my opinion this is a wrong understanding of compassion - I would rather eliminate this animals in such awful conditions than let than survive without proper attending their needs. >Buddhists do really believe that any of us could often have a rebirth >as a non-human being, don't we? So I am sure others have wondered >about this before...... I would suppose that when one reach the human being form should not reborn in a lower realm anymore but seems that is possible if you accumulate akusala or unwholesome deeds. But the Tipitaka experts here can clarify you a lot better than me. Metta Cybele 6286 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 9:36pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Tori --- Tori Korshak wrote: > Dear Jon, > > Thank you very much for your informative reply. Where does the > practitioner > go from here? It is a bit discouraging to think one can't cultivate > uppekha > because it might be akusala. …. You are not the first to have made the observation that my posts are discouraging, so I must face up to the fact that it must be so! My apologies, Tori, if I have cast too negative a light on things -- this certainly was not intended. On the positive side, I think I indicated that it is not in fact necessary to cultivate upekkha in order to develop understanding. The realities arising and presenting themselves at this very moment are suitable objects for study by awareness, if only we realised it. It needs only some understanding at an intellectual level of what the development of awareness involves and particularly what can be its object for the right conditions to be present. There is no other obstacle, except of course our abysmal lack of accumulated awareness and panna, to starting now. On the question of cultivating upekkha, I think I indicated only that one must be truly honest with oneself lest the wrong kind of reality be developed. As I understand it, the cultivation of any wholesome quality/reality begins with (a) understanding as much as possible about the reality intellectually and (b) recognising it when it arises, normally and naturally, in our daily life. It is this recognition, coupled with the appreciation of the wholesomeness of the moment when it arises, that is a condition for the further arising of the same quality in the future, rather than any idea that we should have or would like to have more of it. Does this make sense to you? > …. Is it also true that one could display > gross > dosa and still be experiencing uppekha? I would be unconvinced. I think I said that awareness could arise even during periods of sustained lobha or dosa. If that did in fact happen, then those particular moments arising in amongst all the akusala would be accompanied by the mental factor of upekkha, although we may not necessarily be aware of that characteristic. It helps I think to realise that even during periods of sustained akusala there is not just the lobha or dosa arising, despite our perception to the contrary. There are the usual moments of the 5 sense-door impression -- seeing, hearing, experiences through the body-sense etc -- and the thinking that analyses those objects and forms them into the concepts by which the world is known to us. All this is going on at the same time also, and these moments may not be the least bit coloured by the persistent lobha or dosa. Really, there's nothing to be discouraged about! Jon 6287 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 9:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity --- Herman wrote: > Dear Robert, > > Thank you for this. It explains much. > > It leads me to this question. I understand that this question > may be > seen as being provocative, but I do not have this intention. I > am not > so much concerned with the moral overtones that my question > could > generate. > > My question is, and I ask it completely without bias, does the > the > self-immolation of Thich Quang Duc, June 11, 1963, in Saigon, > Vietnam > bear witness to the equanimity described in the source you > quote? > > My feeling is that it does, but I want to test this. I don't > expect > you to know this monks state of mind when this event occured, > but > from all accounts the man mentally prepared for this event > weeks > before, sat down in the square, was doused with petrol by his > associates and set on fire. He died , from what was visible, > in > complete tranquility. > > Only a few months later, the Catholic based government, which > had set > about to subtly repress Buddhism, and which had not altered > it's > intended course despite months of intensive lobbying from > Buddhist > quarters , including Thich Quang Duc, was overthrown. > > Thank you Robert and anyone else for your considered input. > > Herman > > > > _______________ Dear Herman. Actually I have wondered from time to time over this matter myself. The same act by the falun gong members recently made me think again. In the end I don't think we can know whether either the falung gong or the monk had kusala citta at those times and thus the type of kusala equanimity described in the texts. People can apparently endure pain with a sort of self-hypnotic concentration that is not genuine kusala. From a very cursory reading of the type of meditation that falung gong do I wonder if this was their experience. On the other hand I feel the monk was a different matter - he had years of training and study of Dhamma and would have known a fair amount about kusala and akusala - it may be he had at least some level of genuine equanimity. This is just my pure speculation. I would be interested in other comments also. robert 6288 From: Howard Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 6:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Hi, Robert (and Tadao) - In a message dated 7/14/01 3:23:15 AM Eastern Daylight Time, <> writes: > Excellent post Tadao. > robert > p.s I think the speed of the falling away is even faster than > you mention. > --- ppp wrote: > > Hi, Joe: > > "Mind" or "Conciousness" is not well defined in the > > Theravada Buddhism, simply because from the Buddhist view > > point, there is no "mind" or "conciousness" which we can > > regard as an " entity". From the viewpoint of the Theravada > > Buddhism, each moment of experince is A mind, which may > > probably not last more than 10 or 15 milliseconds. Another > > mind will > > follow the previoius mind, experiencing either the same > > or different object (through the same or different door > > way). So, there is no mind or conciousness which can be > > located in one's body. In the stream of the moment-to-moment > > experiences, in fact, we cannot "find" not only > > mind/conciousness > > but a person who houses it. > > Since there is no mind which we can be defined as an entity in > > a conventional sense, the Theravada Buddhists do not get into > > the > > (Western) philosophical disuccion of the nature of > > mind/conciousness. > > tadao > ============================= I agree, Robert. Tadao has made an important point. If I might add on just one element: While it is the case that there is no continual "mind", it is also the case according to Theravada that there are no gaps between cittas, because of the latent, bhavanga cittas. So, the stream of cittas is gapless and, thus, lends itself to being referred to as "mind". 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) 6289 From: m. nease Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 10:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Jon & Tori, Hope you don't mind my butting in: --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > --- Tori Korshak wrote: > … I wouldn't trust a monk for example who exhibited a > lot > of dosa to have panna. I’m not sure I want to comment on this! But the key thing to remember is the observation made by Robert, that the level of a person’s calmness (or lack of it) is no measure of his/her level of understanding. A monk can have excellent view and very little paññaa because of having experienced little deep insight. As has been repeatedly pointed out recently (I think everyone's in agreement on this), conceptual understanding isn't paññaa. If his sila is really excellent you might not even be aware of a lot of accumulated dosa, lobha and moha because sati, hiri and ottapa will prevent their verbal, physical and in some cases even mental manifestations. So I think he can still be an excellent and worthy monk, striving rightly and preserving the Dhammavinaya even without a lot of paññaa. Well, just my two cents' worth on behalf of the bhikkhus... mike 6290 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 10:51pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Quite right Howard. One of the reasons it is so hard to perceive the arising and falling away is because of this gaplessness. The Abhidhamma points to the many different types of cittas and so the apparent substantiality of 'mind' is shown to be an illusion - and there are then powerful conditions being laid for direct insight into this. robert --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Robert (and Tadao) - > > In a message dated 7/14/01 3:23:15 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > <> writes: > > > > Excellent post Tadao. > > robert > > p.s I think the speed of the falling away is even faster > than > > you mention. > 6291 From: Tori Korshak Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 11:19pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity At 09:36 PM 7/14/01 +0800, you wrote: >Tori > >Really, there's nothing to be discouraged about! > >Jon Dear Jon, No I guess you're right. I wonder if there isn't a world of difference between the conceptualising that men feel so comfortable with as opposed to the more earthy realities women are keen to get to grips with? Metta, Victoria 6292 From: m. nease Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 11:22pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Jon Perfectly pertinent I think (as usual). One point: --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Would you not > consider the clinging to be a possible > object for panna? Since I don't think clinging (upaadaana?) can arise simultaneously with paññaa, then exactly what is it that paññaa takes as an object? Is it the recollection or recognition of clinging? If so, can recollection or recognition be a foundation of mindfulness? (I'm assuming that what can be an object of paññaa can be an object of satipatthana). Thanks in advance. mike 6293 From: Tori Korshak Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 11:31pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Robert, Many thanks. >Dear Tori, >Is that a challenge! >I guess there is more equanimity in my life than before but I >don't like to admit it! (well actually I do, but that is >conceit) No I don't think it is if you are just being honest but I know what you mean because anything one says about oneself is likely to be debated. > I might start thinking I really know something based >on this unreliable indicator. >basically because there is more insight into anatta and >conditions, albeit mostly at an elementary level, this makes >life so much easier to understand. Even just because it is >habitual for me to think of kamma and vipaka - cause and effect- >whenever something untoward happens it is natural that >reflection about kamma arises. And that type of reflection >always comes with equanimity. Yes just had this happen when a woman took my parking space. >Really the whole of the Buddha's teachings condition >equanimity - the more we understand them and put them into practice? > the more this factor is >developed. However, by conditions, until one is very advanced a >coincidence of causes may come about where strong anger or fear >arise. Did you read the examples I gave of the sotapannas who >were distressed and crying after the death of their relations? Sorry I think I missed it but I get the point. >robert If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster and treat those two imposters just the same... Metta, Victoria 6294 From: m. nease Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 11:25pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Jon, --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > In my case I think I > like (a) the sense of > keeping calm when I might otherwise react with lobha > or dosa, and (b) the > idea of being someone who is relatively less subject > to the vagaries of > pleasant and unpleasant feeling. > > None of this of course is kusala of any level! Exactly--what a pity! mike 6295 From: m. nease Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 11:28pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Can we help advance Other Sentient Beings? Dear Christine, --- Christine wrote: But I have noticed that when I am listening to the chant of The Brahma Viharas on Vipassana.com audio files, he comes into the house, into the Study and puts his head on my lap and seems affected in some way. He is an 'outside dog' and never comes into a carpeted area at any other time. This has only started over the last three months. He is not affected otherwise by T.V., radio or CDs. Interesting! Reminds me of Robert's story of the 500 bats--as I don't have the reference, I'll defer to Robert. mike 6296 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 11:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Tori > >Tori > > > >Really, there's nothing to be discouraged about! > > > >Jon > >Dear Jon, >No I guess you're right. I wonder if there isn't a world of difference >between the conceptualising that men feel so comfortable with as opposed to >the more earthy realities women are keen to get to grips with? > >Metta, >Victoria Sadhu, Sadhu, Sadhu!!!!!! No comments to be added. Metta Cybele 6297 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 11:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Tori, --- Tori Korshak wrote: > > > I might start thinking I really know something based > >on this unreliable indicator. > >basically because there is more insight into anatta and > >conditions, albeit mostly at an elementary level, this makes > >life so much easier to understand. Even just because it is > >habitual for me to think of kamma and vipaka - cause and > effect- > >whenever something untoward happens it is natural that > >reflection about kamma arises. And that type of reflection > >always comes with equanimity. > > Yes just had this happen when a woman took my parking space. _________ tell us about your consideration here. It can help others. ------------ > >Really the whole of the Buddha's teachings condition > >equanimity - the more we understand them > > and put them into practice? _______ I often here this type of comment about putting them into practice. It seems that this is what we should do. To me though it seems that understanding itself arises and does its duty according to its nature. Rather than putting anything into practice what is most helpful is if 'I' get out of the way. If someone abuses me, for example, if there is any understanding then there is no bad feeling or wish to react. It could be a condition for immediate thinking about kamma and vipaka in which case there is the level of equanimity of that level. Or there might be satipatthana, of some degree, which knows sound as sound - as simply a dhamma. Then there is no reaction, and also no thinking about putting anything into practice. Once an old boss berated me over some foul up, but at that time I was fascinated with the nature of sound and colour and seeing and was involved with studying these dhammas. I could still comprehend what she was saying but it had no untoward effect. However, my interest, and lack of worry, must have shown because she suddenly got more angry because of my perceived lack of remorse. (When there is equanimity in such situations try not to let the other party know). robert 6298 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 11:56pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity - Kipling Dear Tori >> >No I don't think it is if you are just being honest but I know what you >mean because anything one says about oneself is likely to be debated. So we continue to discuss Dhamma and never relate it to our experience? So sad... >>Rob: > >Really the whole of the Buddha's teachings condition > >equanimity - the more we understand them Tori: >and put them into practice? So smart this woman; Tori prepare your ribcage to a tight hug at the first opportunity. Rob: > > the more this factor is > >developed. However, by conditions, until one is very advanced a > >coincidence of causes may come about where strong anger or fear > >arise. Did you read the examples I gave of the sotapannas who > >were distressed and crying after the death of their relations? > Tori: >Sorry I think I missed it but I get the point. > >If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster and treat those two imposters >just the same... > Now Tori not to be barely provocative, but let's examine this writer that you seem so fond of - Rudyard Kipling. Personally I felt in his books an immense love for India and a very deep understanding of the India culture. Nonetheless Kipling was what we could stereotype as a 'bastard colonialist', he always had heavily opposed against Indian independence. All his understanding and love of India would not allow him to perceive the imperious need for self governement and sovranity of his fellows Indians because he was not at all equanimous in his judgements; he was inclined to paternalistic viewsa bout India and he was absolutely convinbced that the presence of British in India was actually right and fair. He could not see the opression and the injustice. He was too conditioned by his own culture and his love of India that lead him to a 'possessive attitude'. He had both kusala and akusala thoughts and deeds regarding the very same subject. Metta Cybele 6299 From: m. nease Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 0:29am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Robert, --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > (When there is equanimity in such > situations try not to > let the other party know). Ha! Words to live by...People can really take offense, for example, when you don't share their rage over social injustice. Oh well... mike 6300 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 0:33am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity - Mike Dear Mike Tori wrote: > > … I wouldn't trust a monk for example who exhibited >a lot of dosa to have panna. > >I’m not sure I want to comment on this! But the key >thing to remember is >the observation made by Robert, that the level of a >person’s calmness (or >lack of it) is no measure of his/her level of >understanding. Ok till here I can relate. Let's use real, pertinent examples? I am a bit fed up of academic abstractions. I find Bhante Dhammapyio for example not exactly a model of calm and 'let it be' attitude but nevertheless he is very wise. When he retains opportune he doesn't miss kicking derrieres to wake us up from our delusions, including myself. I commited the mistake of reacting immediately myself to his imposing tones ( bhante don't eat me up, you know I love you dearly!) misreading his great capacity for compassion and his insightful view of things. But as indeed he showed wisdom, I could reconsider my position very fast. And I must admit that he is quite attentive lately and doesn't sound anymore 'bossy'. ;-) >As has been repeatedly pointed out recently (I think >everyone's in agreement on this), conceptual >understanding isn't paññaa. It seems most obvious indeed. >If his sila is really >excellent you might not even be aware of a lot of >accumulated dosa, lobha and moha because sati, hiri >and ottapa will prevent their verbal, physical and in >some cases even mental manifestations. So I think he >can still be an excellent and worthy monk, striving >rightly and preserving the Dhammavinaya even without a >lot of paññaa. Yes but you are depicting a monk who anyway has an excellent sila what prevents his aversion, craving, and delusion to fully manifest. What I understood Tori meant is a monk who has manifested a lot of dosa and therefore becomes incongruent with wisdom, because his aversion doesn't allow him to have a penetrative view of reality and without insight there is no wisdom I suppose. The monk is the very model of the Buddha's teachings and accomplishments for the laypeople, the embodiment of Sangha and if he becomes too wordly, meaning delusional and angered it is indeed quite difficult to trust such a person to give you spiritual advice. Personally I don't trust advice from U Pandita himself because he is such a swollenhead, proud, unsympathetic monk that I don't care about his advices. His arrogance precedes him. And my past accumulations led me to be quite responsive to arrogant behavior. The same doesn't happens with Ajahn Sucitto or Sumedho for example, I feel them quite reliable. And many others for that matter. Metta Cybele 6301 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 0:46am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Mike Rob: >> > (When there is equanimity in such > > situations try not to > > let the other party know). Mike: >Ha! Words to live by...People can really take offense, >for example, when you don't share their rage over >social injustice. Oh well... > >mike Well Mike perhaps is not because we don't share their rage but simply because we don't show sympathy for their plight what can be demoralising. Have you thought of it? Metta Cybele 6302 From: Victor Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 0:51am Subject: Re: The meaning of Equanimity > Once an old boss berated me over some foul up, but at that time > I was fascinated with the nature of sound and colour and seeing > and was involved with studying these dhammas. I could still > comprehend what she was saying but it had no untoward effect. > However, my interest, and lack of worry, must have shown because > she suddenly got more angry because of my perceived lack of > remorse. (When there is equanimity in such situations try not to > let the other party know). Perhaps it is possible that apathy to other's feeling is sometimes mistaken for equanimity here? Metta, Victor 6303 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 1:23am Subject: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders Dear Anders Dear group Anders wrote: > > >I don't meditate much myself to be honest. My emphasis is on awareness >in daily life. Cybele: > > The emphasis of everybody must necessarily be on awareness in daily life >Anders unless you seclude yourself in an Himalayan cave to practice formal >meditation continuously and even so.... > > But do you think that formal meditation is not necessary do develop >insight, considering that it was the 'magic formula' taught by the Buddha >himself and it was through Satipathana that he reached enlightenment? Anders: >I think that it depends on your own capacities for progress. Personally, >I'd always recommend seated meditation for those who are prepared to make >the effort, as it can certainly do no harm (unless, you are really really >poor at it :-)). What does it means 'prepared to do the effort'? Meditation is an essential mental training and important part of the Buddhist tradition, as studying and listening to Dhamma. According with the original texts. >But then you have people like Hui-neng, who don't even need to practise. He >hears one phrase from the Diamond Sutra and "Poof", he's enlightened. Well but we are not Hui-neng or have his past accumulations. Unless you are talking only ofr yourself. What I am not going to evaluate or prove right or wrong but I am talking generally. >On the other hand, I know people who have meditated sincerely for 25 years, >and are still as stuck as they were before (well, may be not entirely, >but....). Well this should not be our concern. I refer to my own experience naturally but the fact of being stuck is due to a wrong effort not necessarily to the technique itself. Or to our past accumulations. >It depends on what your own capacities are. If you find that you are >incapable of being mindful, and that you are constantly being dragged >around by your defilements, then meditation might be good for you, so as to >loosen up your deferments. Meditation as such, should be used as a catalyst >to foster awareness throughout your daily life. Well this is the purpose - purification of the mind. And who is not constantly dragged around by defilements? Who can say earnestly that is fair to skip this mental training and not doubt that one is misled by preferences and self conceit? >If you just sit for one hour and then go on with your normal daily >activities as ignorantly as always, then it doesn't matter if you even >attain the Jhanas. You will be a master of meditation, but hardly a master >when it comes to Panna. Well we are considering that one pays attention to daily awareness and not shielding himself behind anything whatsoever - meditation or study or hedonism. And Jhanas are not the goal in Vipassana. We don't practice Samatha to attain Jhanas, we practice Vipassana to develop insight. >On the other hand, if you are more than capable of being equanimous in your >daily life, and observe your mind-states and learn from it, then you might >not need it. Those who aren't sick have no need for medicine. Who can affirm such a thing considering that we are immersed in delusion? Who can be sure of mental health, spiritual health? With such concern I agree that mostly we learn from direct observation of the phenomena in daily awareness but I don't dismiss so easily meditation in formal terms. >Expedient means, such as meditation, are purely used to counter >defilements. If there's nothing to counter, why do it? Expedient means Anders? Meditation is taught everywhere as the core of Buddhist teachings indeed. Naturally I am talking about Buddhism not other approaches that might interest you. >A good friend of mine, also a Theravadan, has found seated meditation >extremely beneficial, and has been able to use that as a catalyst for daily >awareness and thus nurture Panna, which is amazingly strong in him. That is all the point indeed. I just speak about Theravada tradition and Vipassana. What is written in Satipathana Sutta as Buddha's original teaching is unequivocable in my understanding. The Discourse on the Four Foundations of Mindfulness is one of the most famous of all the Buddha's discourses and is the primary source for the practice of Insight meditation as taught by the Buddha himself. Everybody here seems so keen in extrenuously defending the original teaching, how it comes that they neglect meditation? Quotating for further discussion and reference: 'This is the only way, monks, for the purification of beings, for the overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, for the destroying of pain and grief, for reaching the right path, for the realization of Nibbana, namely the Four Foundations of Mindfulness.' Metta Cybele 6304 From: Tori Korshak Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 1:40am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity - Kipling At 03:56 PM 7/14/01 +0000, you wrote: >Dear Cybele, I'm not fond of Kipling's work especially nor even this poem but it does contain a nugget of Buddhist thought which comes back to me sometimes in regards to equanimity so I use it with ambivalence! Metta, Victoria >Now Tori not to be barely provocative, but let's examine this writer that >you seem so fond of - Rudyard Kipling. >Personally I felt in his books an immense love for India and a very deep >understanding of the India culture. >Nonetheless Kipling was what we could stereotype as a 'bastard colonialist', >he always had heavily opposed against Indian independence. >All his understanding and love of India would not allow him to perceive the >imperious need for self governement and sovranity of his fellows Indians >because he was not at all equanimous in his judgements; he was inclined to >paternalistic viewsa bout India and he was absolutely convinbced that the >presence of British in India was actually right and fair. He could not see >the opression and the injustice. >He was too conditioned by his own culture and his love of India that lead >him to a 'possessive attitude'. >He had both kusala and akusala thoughts and deeds regarding the very same >subject. > >Metta > >Cybele 6305 From: Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 1:35am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity It is always amazing to me how much people (and this is not at all directed as a criticism of Cybele!) can seem to garner so much from an email post. In fact, I am told I am often too calm and need to get fired up! Ha! This medium of exchange is very deceptive. Remember, we do not know the inner workings of other human beings from reading our CRT's. When we move with the speed of mind that we do, this medium and its deceptiveness can lead to heedlessness and one can very easily hurt another with words -- especially when people are so attached to them. Not everyone is capable of letting words go... tanha for words... After taking time to reflect and being "silent" on this list and some others, it becomes apparent that sometimes we need to take a long, hard look at the verbolatry that can be made to appear so sincere, so right, so true -- when in fact, the contradictions not only of terms of Dhamma, but of the very Dhamma Itself appear most readily. As far as "butt kicking" is concerned: I am really interested in seeing others manage their own kicks to their derrieres! I have to watch my own derriere and keep it on the cushion more and more! I can only recommend that others do the same. Practice is where it is at... not in chatter. When it comes to Dhamma, my sometimes perhaps, imposing tones are not what matters. Often, some people just cannot handle the truth and subvert it into an emotional reaction, railing against the person who expresses it and projecting their own difficulties. In this case, "I" hardly matters. I am not here to have go around after go around. Sometimes, too, no matter what peripheral words we use to deliver the truth with, it can still be hard for another to realize. The advice of the Blessed One was to avoid extremism and fanaticism, and to be especially careful of holding views. Look at what people write --- it is forensic. We do not retract the written word as easily as vocalized speech. The two are entirely different in many respects. What I cannot sometimes feel at ease with is the way the simple Dhamma and its practice gets turned into something complex and seemingly out of reach for so many. While we have this luxury, I am reminded of the illiterate people I have met in Asia who practice Dhamma and meditate and "get it". They may not be so erudite but they practice, and practice well. They literally shine light and live the Dhamma which is observed in their daily lives and actions. I wonder what they would offer concerning all the words floating around made to look so important? I wonder if some of us could be open to the advice of an illiterate dirt farmer or a housewife with zero formal education? Let's just face the facts, a lion's roar does not exactly fit in with the New Age "fluff" and the subversion of the Dhamma we can readily see for ourselves. A small point here is that there is no such thing as "modernizing" the Dhamma. It is not something to be bought and sold like a commodity and, in fact, it is "big business" today. If we are to have a great capacity for compassion, then it has to begin with ourselves, yes, but in fact, too, it is always other directed when it is real compassion. And that may seem paradoxical but in fact it tells us how deeply interconnected we actually all are. Something that would help here: Let us not be so concerned that we are offended, but more concerned that we offend! Enough words. I would rather leave us with one for practice and with its full implications: Metta, Bhante D. 6306 From: Tori Korshak Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 1:50am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity - Mike >Dear Cybele, >Yes but you are depicting a monk who anyway has an excellent sila what >prevents his aversion, craving, and delusion to fully manifest. >What I understood Tori meant is a monk who has manifested a lot of dosa and >therefore becomes incongruent with wisdom, because his aversion doesn't >allow him to have a penetrative view of reality and without insight there is >no wisdom I suppose. >The monk is the very model of the Buddha's teachings and accomplishments for >the laypeople, the embodiment of Sangha and if he becomes too wordly, >meaning delusional and angered it is indeed quite difficult to trust such a >person to give you spiritual advice. Yes this is what I meant. >Personally I don't trust advice from U Pandita himself because he is such a >swollenhead, proud, unsympathetic monk that I don't care about his advices. >His arrogance precedes him. >And my past accumulations led me to be quite responsive to arrogant >behavior. >The same doesn't happens with Ajahn Sucitto or Sumedho for example, I feel >them quite reliable. >And many others for that matter. > >Metta > >Cybele > >Many thanks. Metta, Victoria 6307 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 2:01am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity - Kipling Dear Tori > >Dear Cybele, > >I'm not fond of Kipling's work especially nor even this poem but it does >contain a nugget of Buddhist thought which comes back to me sometimes in >regards to equanimity so I use it with ambivalence! > >Metta, >Victoria This is the famous anglosaxon humour that I cannot get always. :-) However I wanted to illustrate my thought about the subject and Kipling served its purpose. No time or energy wasted. Fair enough. ;-) See you tomorrow at Sarah's mother place in Sussex. Love Cybele > > >Now Tori not to be barely provocative, but let's examine this writer that > >you seem so fond of - Rudyard Kipling. > >Personally I felt in his books an immense love for India and a very deep > >understanding of the India culture. > >Nonetheless Kipling was what we could stereotype as a 'bastard >colonialist', > >he always had heavily opposed against Indian independence. > >All his understanding and love of India would not allow him to perceive >the > >imperious need for self governement and sovranity of his fellows Indians > >because he was not at all equanimous in his judgements; he was inclined >to > >paternalistic viewsa bout India and he was absolutely convinbced that the > >presence of British in India was actually right and fair. He could not >see > >the opression and the injustice. > >He was too conditioned by his own culture and his love of India that lead > >him to a 'possessive attitude'. > >He had both kusala and akusala thoughts and deeds regarding the very same > >subject. > > > >Metta > > > >Cybele > 6308 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 2:06am Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders Dear Cybele, I have considered not responding to your message, as I wasn't too sure how contagious the Latin blood is... ;-). --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > The Discourse on the Four Foundations of Mindfulness is one of the most > famous of all the Buddha's discourses and is the primary source for the > practice of Insight meditation as taught by the Buddha himself. > Everybody here seems so keen in extrenuously defending the original > teaching, how it comes that they neglect meditation? But since you have mentioned this point multiple times (with no challenges, no less!), I will attempt one explanation to this question. If you have looked at Anders' post of Nina's article, you will see that not everybody interprets the Buddha's teachings of Satipatthana and Vipassana the same way. If I read what Nina is saying right, Satipatthana is knowing the characteristics of the reality that is currently arising now. With this definition, it is immaterial, when Satipathana is rising, whether or not you are sitting cross-legged, closing your eyes, and observing you breath, or whether or not you are attending a retreat. Now let's take Robert, your favorite dhamma friend, for a hypothetical example. Let's say, he is convinced (or knows) that what Nina says is about right. How do you think "he" meditates/practices Satipatthana/Vipassana? "He" knows the characteristics of the rising nama/rupa as they truly are as they are arising. Now, if it is not obvious already, I am not trying to convey what Satipathana is, but I hope you understand (may not agree) why some people say they don't "meditate." The saying of such doesn't mean that they are denying the development of wisdom. Your intellectualizing-male friend, kom 6309 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 2:14am Subject: Equanimity and Bhante Dear Bhante So nice your straightforwardeness, much appreciation! I can't take it all and respect you honesty. First place I did not declare that you are 'nervy' or anything like that but you are not conventionally the classic 'calm almost aphatic', meaning by this aloof, Theravada monk. This I wanted to enhance. As you can see you immediately <> to my remarks and took charge of the situation in order to clarify and to express your viewpoint. This is what I appreciate and at the beginning would let me perplexed as my experience with monks, whether easterners as westerners was much more familiar with extremes of aloofness or arrogance than your assertive tones. Translating or they ignore you or they 'preach' you. And I am talking about real life not virtual exchanges. I send this right away and after will continue the discussion of this subject. Metta Cybele >>It is always amazing to me how much people (and this is not at all >>directed >as a criticism of Cybele!) can seem to garner so much from an email post. >In >fact, I am told I am often too calm and need to get fired up! Ha! > >This medium of exchange is very deceptive. Remember, we do not know the >inner workings of other human beings from reading our CRT's...... 6310 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 2:33am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Kom >Dear Cybele, > >I have considered not responding to your message, as I wasn't too sure >how contagious the Latin blood is... ;-). If I ever manage to wind up you and Robert I will feel very powerful indeed!!! ;-) I should be so lucky! Kom I am very glad that you replied and will be my pleasure discuss this issue that for me is quite valuable with a person like you with sense and sensibility. Love Cybele > >--- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > The Discourse on the Four Foundations of Mindfulness is one of the >most > > famous of all the Buddha's discourses and is the primary source for the > > practice of Insight meditation as taught by the Buddha himself. > > Everybody here seems so keen in extrenuously defending the original > > teaching, how it comes that they neglect meditation? > >But since you have mentioned this point multiple times (with no >challenges, no less!), I will attempt one explanation to this question. > >If you have looked at Anders' post of Nina's article, you will see that not >everybody interprets the Buddha's teachings of Satipatthana and >Vipassana the same way. If I read what Nina is saying right, >Satipatthana is knowing the characteristics of the reality that is >currently >arising now. With this definition, it is immaterial, when Satipathana is >rising, whether or not you are sitting cross-legged, closing your eyes, and >observing you breath, or whether or not you are attending a retreat. > >Now let's take Robert, your favorite dhamma friend, for a hypothetical >example. Let's say, he is convinced (or knows) that what Nina says is >about right. How do you think "he" meditates/practices >Satipatthana/Vipassana? "He" knows the characteristics of the rising >nama/rupa as they truly are as they are arising. > >Now, if it is not obvious already, I am not trying to convey what >Satipathana is, but I hope you understand (may not agree) why some >people say they don't "meditate." The saying of such doesn't mean that >they are denying the development of wisdom. > >Your intellectualizing-male friend, > >kom > > > 6311 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 2:35am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Equanimity and Bhante - correction >From: "cybele chiodi" >Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Equanimity and Bhante >Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 18:14:56 -0000 > > >Dear Bhante > >So nice your straightforwardeness, much appreciation! >I can't take it all and respect you honesty. I meant I CAN take it all. Sorry bhante! Cybele 6312 From: Tori Korshak Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 2:54am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity At 08:43 AM 7/14/01 -0700, you wrote: >Dear Robert, > >--- > > > > > I might start thinking I really know something based > > >on this unreliable indicator. > > >basically because there is more insight into anatta and > > >conditions, albeit mostly at an elementary level, this makes > > >life so much easier to understand. Even just because it is > > >habitual for me to think of kamma and vipaka - cause and > > effect- > > >whenever something untoward happens it is natural that > > >reflection about kamma arises. And that type of reflection > > >always comes with equanimity. > > > > Yes just had this happen when a woman took my parking space. Just as you say-seeing the transaction as kamma and vipaka, equanimity arose. >_________ >tell us about your consideration here. It can help others. Just as you say-seeing the transaction as kamma and vipaka, equanimity arose. >------------ > > > >Really the whole of the Buddha's teachings condition > > >equanimity - the more we understand them > > > > and put them into practice? >_______ >I often here this type of comment about putting them into >practice. It seems that this is what we should do. To me though >it seems that understanding itself arises and does its duty >according to its nature. Rather than putting anything into >practice what is most helpful is if 'I' get out of the way. >If someone abuses me, for example, if there is any understanding >then there is no bad feeling or wish to react. >It could be a condition for immediate thinking about kamma and >vipaka in which case there is the level of equanimity of that >level. Or there might be satipatthana, of some degree, which >knows sound as sound - as simply a dhamma. Then there is no >reaction, and also no thinking about putting anything into >practice. >Once an old boss berated me over some foul up, but at that time >I was fascinated with the nature of sound and colour and seeing >and was involved with studying these dhammas. I could still >comprehend what she was saying but it had no untoward effect. >However, my interest, and lack of worry, must have shown because >she suddenly got more angry because of my perceived lack of >remorse. (When there is equanimity in such situations try not to >let the other party know). Ha! This is very funny ,but I have also seen it defuse situations. When there is little reaction, they can cool off quickly too as long as equanimity is not (or is not perceived as ) indifference. >robert Metta, Victoria 6313 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 3:04am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Kom >>Dear Cybele, > >I have considered not responding to your message, as I wasn't too sure >how contagious the Latin blood is... ;-). Highly contagious; you will end up dancing the salsa in a buddhist temple! ;-) >--- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > The Discourse on the Four Foundations of Mindfulness is one of the >most famous of all the Buddha's discourses and is the primary source for >the practice of Insight meditation as taught by the Buddha himself. > > Everybody here seems so keen in extrenuously defending the original > > teaching, how it comes that they neglect meditation? Kom: >But since you have mentioned this point multiple times (with no >challenges, no less!), I will attempt one explanation to this question. > >If you have looked at Anders' post of Nina's article, you will see that not >everybody interprets the Buddha's teachings of Satipatthana and >Vipassana the same way. That's the crucial point that I want to clarify!!! To me and not only, to lots of scholars and practitioners, the interpretation of Satipathana can be only one and all attempts to disclose other meanings are subverting the so called original tradition. >If I read what Nina is saying right, >Satipatthana is knowing the characteristics of the reality that is >currently arising now. With this definition, it is immaterial, when >Satipathana is rising, whether or not you are sitting cross-legged, closing >your eyes, and observing you breath, or whether or not you are attending a >retreat. I am not alluding to any retreat but to formal ordinary practice as a means of mental training to sharpen the mind and weaken defilements. The fact that we apply the very same instructions in daily awareness it seems to me just logical. The practice must be a continuum. But this is not a justification to neglect the formal practice whatsoever. > >Now let's take Robert, your favorite dhamma friend, for a hypothetical >example. Let's say, he is convinced (or knows) that what Nina says is >about right. How do you think "he" meditates/practices >Satipatthana/Vipassana? "He" knows the characteristics of the rising >nama/rupa as they truly are as they are arising. I am perfectly aware that Robert doesn't practice formal meditation anymore Kom. It doesn't disturb me that much indeed. And I am not inferring in anybody's personal choices or considerations. I most value and everybody knows by now - spiritual independence. What I want to assess is the actual interpretation of the Satipathana Sutta. You know very well that very few Dhamma teachers (laymen or monastics) ever dare to dismiss the formal practice whether enhancing or not the direct observation of reality, nama rupa. This is my query. And I am voicinbg out the perplexities of quite a lot of members of this list as well. > >Now, if it is not obvious already, I am not trying to convey what >Satipathana is, but I hope you understand (may not agree) why some >people say they don't "meditate." The saying of such doesn't mean that >they are denying the development of wisdom. I never thought or hinted so. I am only and earnestly as in my habitual pattern trying to research on this issue that most interest me. I suffered from clinical depression, a terrible crisis quite recently (and you well know) yet I could realize myself that even in such particular conditions I was able to observe the arising and characteristics of phenomena and develop right understanding of my own suffering. This doesn't solve my question however. Unlike you I ma trying to convey what Satipathana is. :-) > >Your intellectualizing-male friend, > >kom > Your hotblooded/passionate female friend. ;-) Love Cybele 6314 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 3:43am Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Cybele, You definitely peaked my interest. --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > I am not alluding to any retreat but to formal ordinary practice as a means > of mental training to sharpen the mind and weaken defilements. > The fact that we apply the very same instructions in daily awareness it > seems to me just logical. > The practice must be a continuum. > But this is not a justification to neglect the formal practice whatsoever. What do you mean by formal practice? When people say they want to follow a practice, I often interpret that they mean following some set of taught behaviors and paying attention to certain objects. I have attended two different "types" of retreats, each of which the teachers mentioned that the practices were in fact taken from the Satipathanna sutta. Both of them have these components: 1) Sitting cross-legged, and "bind" one's attention to the breathing. At this point, although other objects may arise, one "acknowledges" it and then lets it go, and goes back to paying attention to breathing. 2) Walking slowly and paying attention to certain things. 3) Doing some thing else, but paying attention to certain things. 4) No talking during such retreat. kom 6315 From: John Palmer Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 4:09am Subject: A lurker surfaces (again)..... Hello everybody, Having followed this fascinating group for around a month the urge to participate is finally overcoming my 'Anglo-Saxon reticence' as my friend Cybele would say :-) A few of you may know me from my recent 'de-lurking' in Dhamma-List in which case I apologise for the repetition. My name is John Palmer and I'm based in Romford, not far from London. I'm 39 and having been practising for around 4 years, my interest having been stirred up by a course at the Buddhist Society here. I'm very much a beginner and am sensitive to the advanced level of dialogue in this group - I will try and make sure my posts are suitable for this audience. I am just beginning to study Abhidhamma via Nina van Gorkom's books and various web resources as mentioned here. I'd like to thank you all for helping inspire me to deepen my practice and take the jump into attempting to learn Abhidhamma - the wisdom of the contributions here is very evident. With Metta John 6316 From: Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 4:04am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Equanimity and Bhante Dear Cybele, You are welcome. One thing I have had over the years is a good sense of humor. I think that the Blessed One probably had a very good one, too. The important thing is for us to be honest --- but not hurt others with words --- even when truthful. The other day I met two young men who were preaching Islam to me. I listened. And having had perhaps a bit more on the ball in terms of theological background, and having studied Islam and the Koran, I could have been critical and made them look like fools, but what would this serve? In the end, I was told by one of the young men that it was my "type of person" that Islam badly needed! Why? Because when we live the Holy Life it shows. No need to have any pride and no need to be ostentatious or to ostracize! I know you did not make a declaration that I was nervy! LOL!!! But what is interesting is how you mentioned I was not the ""conventionally the classic 'calm almost [apathetic], meaning by this aloof, Theravada monk." Isn't interesting how stereotypes prevail? Being gentle is not to be so aloof, and aloofness is detachment not lethargy and apathy. And another thing, too, is that the Sangha is not a heard of sheep or cattle. I do not see myself as <> to your remarks as much as trying to respond! And it is not a matter of taking charge, either, as much as it is a matter of "response-ability" read: "responsibility". As long as we know about volition and know that the how of living is not as important when we have a why to live, then we can see how communication will eventually develop and be enhanced to facilitate a common experiential ground to share in to practice in --- and it is hardly confining, but most liberating. Again, I think taking time to observe rather to always jump to the keyboard (and this is not to accuse anyone in particular) to give a view allows us the pausing or spacing that is necessary to be sure one is practicing sati as much as is possible. Often times, people do not intend to be akusala but they end up in that situation. Why? They lose skillfulness and get pulled into the very things they really do not want to be pulled into. Again, lobha, dosa, moha, avijja and tanha. So often we have the map and the directions but we end up getting lost from reading the signs and following directions on the road. And these days, it seems to me, that people choose the fast lane and speed. Speed kills. There is nothing I know of in the Tipitaka that says one has to practice in the ways we see practice being carried out today. Expecting that the Dhamma is to fit into a life-style and must change in conform to meet the times is not Right View. It is we, with out life-styles, and all the things that go with them, and with all the New Age "stuff" that needs to conform to the Dhamma. I close with these wonderful teachings: Letting Go "We" are like a tree. "Attachment" is like vines. If we feel desire for sights, they'll wind around our eyes. If we feel desire for sounds, they'll wind around our ears, and so forth. When we're all tangled up like this, we'll have to die. Some people don't let themselves die naturally. They take their attachments and tie up their own throats. * The world is like red ants that crawl along vines. If we cut away the vines that entangle our tree, the ants won't be able to get to it. * We have to cut away whatever we can. If the mind is long, make it short. If it's short, make it round. If it's round, make it smooth. If it's smooth, make it shine. That way it can roll around without getting stuck on anything, and can gain release from all suffering and stress. * Suffering comes from "having." This is why people in the world are suffering so. If they have five, they want to increase it to ten. Once they have ten they think they'll be able to relax. But when they actually get ten, they then increase it to 100. And then they have to keep looking for more all the time, for fear that they'll lose what they have. Only when they stop breathing will they stop looking for more. This is why we're taught that having is suffering. And this is why the Buddha arranged not to have anything at all. He said, "Physical form, feeling, perception, thought-formations, and consciousness are not mine. The senses of sight, hearing, smell, taste, feeling, and ideation are not mine." When nothing was his, how could anyone take anything away from him? Who could come and oppress him? If people give us things, we say that we "get," that we "have." If they take them away, we say that we "lose." But when there's nothing to own, there's no having or losing. And when that's the case, where will there be any suffering? * Nibbana is the end of all having and lacking. * If we don't know how to let go, we're going to suffer. Suppose that we're carrying something in our hand. If we don't let it go and put it down, we won't be able to take hold of anything better than what we've got. This is why the Buddha taught us to let go. For one thing, our hand won't get sweaty from carrying things around. Secondly, we can take what we've put down, turn it over, and look at it from every side to see what it really is. Say that we're holding a knife tight in our fist. We can't look at it to see what kind of knife it is. But if we open our fist and put the knife down, we can then look at it carefully to see whether it's made from steel, wood, horn, or ivory, whether it's well-made or not, and what uses it's good for. * To hold onto the body is to hold onto old kamma. To let go of the body is to let go of old kamma. And when we can let go in this way, there will be no more kamma in the body. It's the same as with a piece of property. If we take possession of it, with a deed and the boundary staked out, there tend to be problems with trespassing, swindling, boundary disputes, and cases in court. But if we don't take possession of it, and simply let it be public property, there will be no troubles or quarrels. This way the heart can be at its ease. * If the heart gets caught up on anything, it's got to be bad. If you can see being born and not being born as equal, being sick and not being sick as equal, dying and not dying as equal, as having the same price, then the mind can relax and not be caught up on anything at all. * In the first stage we let go of evil and start doing good. In the second stage we let go of evil and some forms of good. In the third stage we let go of everything good and evil, because everything is fashioned by nature and thus undependable. We do good but we're not attached to it. When you let go, you have to do it intelligently, and not in a ruinous way -- i.e., by not doing good. You can't hold on even to your opinions, much less to material things. When you do good, you do it for the sake of the living beings of the world, for your children and grandchildren. You do everything in the best way possible, but you're not attached to it, because you know that all things fashioned are inconstant. This way your heart can be clear and bright like a jewel. If you get caught up on praise or blame, you're foolish. It's like drinking other people's saliva. When you act rightly, there are people who will say that you're right and those who will say that you're wrong. When you act wrong, there are people who will say that you're wrong and those who will say that you're right. There's nothing constant about good or evil, right or wrong. * Evil comes from good, and good from evil. For example, when we eat rice we say it's delicious, but then as it goes down through the body it turns into something just the opposite. Thieves come from rich people. If people didn't have possessions and treasures, where would there be any thieves to steal from them? The Buddha saw that evil isn't something you can depend upon. Good isn't something you can depend upon. That's why he let go of both good and evil by not connecting their wires into his heart. He gained release from all good and evil and so transcended all the affairs of the world (loka-dhamma). That was how he entered the highest happiness. * The power of good and evil is like a magnet that pulls the mind to do good or evil and then be born in good or evil places in line with its pull. If we do good or evil, it's as if we leave magnets behind in the world. Those magnets will pull our minds to their level. People who aren't intelligent enough to know how to avoid or extract themselves from the power of good and evil are sure to be pulled along by the force field of these magnets. They'll have to keep swimming around in the world of rebirth. This is why wise people try to find a way to cut the force field so that they can escape its power and float free. In other words, they do good and cut the force field. They do things that may not be good, and they cut the force field. They don't let these things connect. In other words, they don't get attached to the things they've done. They don't keep fondling them. This is what it means to be discerning: knowing how to cut the force fields of the world. * The mind is neither good nor evil, but it's what knows good and knows evil. It's what does good and does evil. And it's what lets go of good and lets go of evil. * It's not the case that things will progress if we cling to them, or deteriorate if we let them go. * Attachment is like a bridge. If there's no bridge, who's going to walk across it? There's just this side of the river and the other side. The eye exists, so it can see both sides, but there's no connection. The mind that isn't caught up on its preoccupations is like a lotus leaf in the water. The water can't seep into the leaf. It simply rolls around as a bead across the surface. There's awareness, but no attachment. * Awareness without attachment is like electricity without a wire. There's just brightness. When there's no wire, no one can get electrocuted. Or you could say that it's like a flame that doesn't need a lamp. No wick gets used up, no oil gets consumed, and yet there's light. * If we separate the body and the mind from each other, our ordinary awareness disappears, but that doesn't mean that awareness is annihilated. It's still there, but it's a special awareness that doesn't have to depend on the body or mind. It's the same as when we separate the wax of a candle from its wick: The flame disappears, but the fire potential isn't annihilated. Whether or not there's fuel, it exists in the world by its very nature. This is the awareness of nibbana. * Arahants can speak and act, but they don't speak or act the way ordinary people do. They know how to separate things. Like a person speaking over the radio: Even though we may hit the radio, it doesn't reach the person speaking. * The experience of release has no sense of "before" or "after," or even any "present." * When the heart is empty, it feels light and free, with no preoccupations at all. Like a bird: Even though it has feet, it doesn't leave any tracks in the air. In the same way, when the mind is empty, even if people criticize you there's no writing in the air. Nothing gets stuck in the heart. * Tranquillity meditation means to keep the mind quiet in craving. Insight meditation means knowing both the mind with craving and the mind without craving. Knowing perceptions of past and future for what they are is intuitive knowledge. This kind of knowledge isn't stuck on any perceptions at all. This is called the skill of release. It's not stuck on the mind with craving or the mind without craving. It's like writing letters in the air. The air doesn't get used up, the writing doesn't require any effort, and you can't read what it says at all. Whether you write good or bad things, you can't read what they say. The air is there, but as for shapes in the air, there are none. from: The Skill of Release Teachings of Ajaan Lee Dhammadharo (Phra Suddhidhammaransi Gambhiramedhacariya) Compiled and Translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu Copyright © 1995, 1999 Metta Forest Monastery For free distribution only. You may reprint this work for free distribution. You may re-format and redistribute this work for use on computers and computer networks provided that you charge no fees for its distribution or use. Otherwise, all rights reserved. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai/lee/skillof.html#letting With Maha Metta, Bhante D. 6317 From: Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 4:06am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] A lurker surfaces (again)..... -----Original Message----- From: John Palmer Date: Saturday, July 14, 2001 4:09 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] A lurker surfaces (again)..... >Hello everybody, > >Having followed this fascinating group for around a month the urge to >participate is finally overcoming my 'Anglo-Saxon reticence' as my friend >Cybele would say :-) > >A few of you may know me from my recent 'de-lurking' in Dhamma-List in which >case I apologise for the repetition. > >My name is John Palmer and I'm based in Romford, not far from London. I'm 39 >and having been practising for around 4 years, my interest having been >stirred up by a course at the Buddhist Society here. > >I'm very much a beginner We are all beginners here... no matter how many years we have been practicing... the trick though is to stay a beginner! ;-) 6318 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 5:29am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Kom > >Dear Cybele, > >You definitely peaked my interest. Ha, ha!!! I've hooked you! ;-) > "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > > > I am not alluding to any retreat but to formal ordinary practice as a >means of mental training to sharpen the mind and weaken defilements. > >The fact that we apply the very same instructions in daily awareness it >seems to me just logical. > > The practice must be a continuum. > > But this is not a justification to neglect the formal practice >whatsoever. Kom: >What do you mean by formal practice? When people say they want to >follow a practice, I often interpret that they mean following some set of >taught behaviors and paying attention to certain objects. The taught behaviour that you allude to is 'taught' by the Buddha himself not any re-elaborated technique inspired on Buddhist philosophy. I quote from the Satipathana Sutta literally and you can verify the authenticity of my words on the Maha-Satipathana-Sutta being the 22nd Text of the Collection of Long Discourses of the Buddha (Digha- Nikaya, as you I read the texts even if I am not a fundamentalist. "This is the sole way, monks, for the purification of beings, for the overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, for the destroying of pain and grief, for reaching the right path, for the realization of Nibbana, namely the Four Foundations of Mindfulness." "What are the Four? Herein (in this teaching) a monk dwells practising body-contemplation on the body, ardent, clearly comprehending and mindful, having overcome covetousness and grief concerning the world: he dwells practising feeling-contemplation on feelings, ardent, etc, etc: he dwells practising mind-contemplation on the mind, ardent, etc...: He dwells practising mind-object-contemplation on mind-objects aredent, clearly......" "The contemplation of the Body Mindfulness of Breathing And how , monks does a monk dwell practising body-contemplation on the body? Herein, monks, a monk having gone to the forest, to the foot of a tree, or to an empty place, sits down cross-legged, keeps his body erect and his mindfulness alert. Just mindful he breathes in and mindful he breathes out....." Well, this is just the beginning of the instructions but as you can notice the posture as the mental attitude is all about 'meditation' as a fundamental tool to foster awareness and get insights into the reality of body, feelings, mind, mental contents. I will continue in another mail, this is only to clarify the source of the so called instructions about meditation as a mean to develop insight contained in the Satipathana Sutta. Metta Cybele 6319 From: ppp Date: Sat Jul 14, 2001 10:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Hi, Robert: As for the speed of falling, my guess is it is around 10 to 15 milliseconds. If you have 100 millisecconds, you can access to the meanining of a (familiar) word stored in your brain. If a word is ambigous (e.g. bank (a river back, and financial bank)), both of its meanings are accessed within the first 50 milliseconds of its presentation, and then a processor (human) chooses the contextually correct meaning in the next 50 milliseconds. Subliminall stimuli can be created if their presentation last less than 50 milliseconds. In other words, whithin such a short period of time, we start dwelling on the world of concepts. So, those who have keen pa~~nnaa should be able to "see" (in a figurative use) the world whose arising and falling should be far shorter than 50 milliseconds. However, if (perceptual) phenomena arise and fall as quickly as you've suggested, how would it be possible to "perceive" objects. So my guess on the time of arising/falling of objects is far shorter than 50 milliseconds but not as short as, say, a few milliseconds. Sorry, it's my pure guss. tadao 6320 From: Derek Cameron Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 6:37am Subject: Re: (Vakkali-Ray) --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > If you know latin - especially the grammar- you have a good > basis for learning pali Robert, I have 4 years of high-school Latin and 2 years of university Sanskrit and it's still an effort to learn Pali! Best regards, Derek. 6321 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 6:58am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Vakkali-Ray) Dear Derek Dear group >--- Robert Kirkpatrick > wrote: > > If you know latin - especially the grammar- you have a good > > basis for learning pali > >Robert, > >I have 4 years of high-school Latin and 2 years of university >Sanskrit and it's still an effort to learn Pali! > >Best regards, > >Derek. Sadhu x 3 dhammafriend for remarking this fact. Indeed everytime I see the Pali abstrusities non translated in this as in others lists I wonder if the language agreed to discuss the subjects is actually English or if we are supposed to learn Pali before subscribing. Metta Cybele 6322 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 7:37am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) Rob --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > dear Robert E. > I got around to looking up some details on alcohol. > In the kuddakatapatha by Buddhaghosa (translated as Minor > readings PTS by nanamoli). > there is a comprehensive section ion the precepts. > on p24 -25 it notes that the blamableness of an action varies > according to its degree. hence killing a large animal is worse > than killing an insect because of the degree of effort involved > and other factors. it has many details. > there is one interesting part " But unlike killing, drinking is > always greatly blamable. Why? because it obstructs the ariyan > Dhamma by inducing even madness in a human being". Thanks for this sobering reminder. Jon > p32 "the fruits of abstaining from the opportunity for > negilgence due to wine or liquor are such things as quick > recognition of past, future and present tasks to be done, > constant establishment of mindfulness, possession of knowledge, > non-stupidty, non-drivelingness,,,non-confusion, > non-timorousness, non-presumption, uneviousness, truthfulness, > freedom from malicious and harsh speech and from gossip, freedom > from dullness day and night, gratitude, libearlty, possesion of > conscience, great understanding, rectitude of view, skill in > distinguishing skill from unskill, and so on"END QUOTE. > > robert > 6323 From: ppp Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 1:03am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Vakkali-Ray) Hi, Derek: You have a very good language background. You can start reading a Pali text, placing the text and its translation side-by-side. I am familar with Pali (because I was a Buddhist monk in South-east Asia having spent 12 hours a day reading its texts for the duratin of several years. Spendijng just two months in May and June, I've picked up Sanskrit and teaching it right now as a university credit summer course. (I have 45 students with various language/linguistic background.) Those who know Pali CANNOT read Sanskrit straighforwardly. However, those who know Sanskrit SHOULDN'T have much problem in reading Pali. I strongly encourage you to start reading Pali texts. Don't start with Pali grammar, but start reading the Pali texts. tadao 6324 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 8:40am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Bhante > >It is always amazing to me how much people (and this is not at all directed >as a criticism of Cybele!) can seem to garner so much from an email post. >In fact, I am told I am often too calm and need to get fired up! Ha! Ha! Great Bhante and BTW even if you criticize me I can survive: despite the stereotype I am capable of keeping very cool and accepting situations without making fuss. And if I make fuss I can observe it and reconsider. ;-) However even if will be misread as criticism directed to me, no matter in the least. Fire up bhante! :-))) >This medium of exchange is very deceptive. Remember, we do not know the >inner workings of other human beings from reading our CRT's. When we move >with the speed of mind that we do, this medium and its deceptiveness can >lead to heedlessness and one can very easily hurt another with words -- >especially when people are so attached to them. Not everyone is capable of >letting words go... tanha for words... Bhante you touched a subject very dear to me. Practitioners are so prone to observe 'emotional attachments' and refrain from them, like escaping the devil and also blame easily who is ardent and hotblooded as not adequate or enough evolved in the practice but then they are so attached and clinging to their own ideas, conceptual knowledge and intellectual skills and cleverness. What changes - attachment is attachment whether it refers to feelings, to sex, or to ideas. > >After taking time to reflect and being "silent" on this list and some >others, it becomes apparent that sometimes we need to take a long, hard >look at the verbolatry that can be made to appear so sincere, so right, so >true -- when in fact, the contradictions not only of terms of Dhamma, but >of the very Dhamma Itself appear most readily. Verbolatry...bhante I like it too much, very smart! Wait that I must take the cushion to protect my derriere! ;-) Cool bhante, cool! :-) > >The advice of the Blessed One was to avoid extremism and fanaticism, and to >be especially careful of holding views. Look at what people write --- it is >forensic. We do not retract the written word as easily as vocalized >speech.The two are entirely different in many respects. > >What I cannot sometimes feel at ease with is the way the simple Dhamma and >its practice gets turned into something complex and seemingly out of reach >for so many. While we have this luxury, I am reminded of the illiterate >people I have met in Asia who practice Dhamma and meditate and "get it". >They may not be so erudite but they practice, and practice well. They >literally shine light and live the Dhamma which is observed in their daily >lives and actions. I wonder what they would offer concerning all the words >floating around made to look so important? I wonder if some of us could be >open to the advice of an illiterate dirt farmer or a housewife with zero >formal education? Dear Bhante, see I told you were wise without being all holy and serene/detached fashion. Yes the lion's roar; I really appreciate very much! Sadhu, Sadhu, Sadhu!!!!! I was missing you in the lists, welcome back. In all earnest. The friend I recently introduced you is highly impressed; good bhante you are increasing my own prestige with him, hehehehe!!!Joking! ;-) Metta and a hug Cybele 6325 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 9:08am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Equanimity and Bhante Dear Bhante > >Dear Cybele, > >You are welcome. > >One thing I have had over the years is a good sense of humor. I think that >the Blessed One probably had a very good one, too. Suppose so, who takes oneself too seriously cannot be very smart indeed let alone enlightened. > >The important thing is for us to be honest --- but not hurt others with >words --- even when truthful. Hope my being straightforward haven't hurt you, if so I was unskilful because it was not my intention at all. I most value our friendship and you know that I am very fond of you. If I did hurt your feelings I apologyse, it was out of clumsiness not hostility for sure. > >The other day I met two young men who were preaching Islam to me. I >listened. And having had perhaps a bit more on the ball in terms of >theological background, and having studied Islam and the Koran, I could >have been critical and made them look like fools, but what would this >serve? In the end, I was told by one of the young men that it was my "type >of person" that Islam badly needed! Why? Because when we live the Holy Life >it shows. >No need to have any pride and no need to be ostentatious or to ostracize! Please Bhante, don't convert to Islam I beg you!!!! :-) > >I know you did not make a declaration that I was nervy! LOL!!! > >But what is interesting is how you mentioned I was not the ""conventionally >the classic 'calm almost [apathetic], meaning by >this aloof, Theravada monk." > >Isn't interesting how stereotypes prevail? Being gentle is not to be so >aloof, and aloofness is detachment not lethargy and apathy. And another >thing, too, is that the Sangha is not a heard of sheep or cattle. Stereotypes originate somehow in genuine patterns of behaviour after used as term of reference and generalization. But let it be bhante...I have met enough monks and I can discern the gentle, detached one from the aphatetic, indifferent. By the way thanks for the grammar correction, with this lists I will finish to master this language one day... :-) > >I do not see myself as <> to your remarks as much as trying to >respond! Indeed that's why I used that signs to distinguish the word. I mean, you are quite immediate in your responses. You don't retreat in social conveniences to be accomodating. And it is not a matter of taking charge, either, as much as it is a >matter of "response-ability" read: "responsibility". bhante, the lecture.... dosa, dosa arising! ;-) > >As long as we know about volition and know that the how of living is not as >important when we have a why to live, then we can see how communication >will eventually develop and be enhanced to facilitate a common experiential >ground to share in to practice in --- and it is hardly confining, but most >liberating. Agree without strain. > >Again, I think taking time to observe rather to always jump to the keyboard >(and this is not to accuse anyone in particular) to give a view allows us >the pausing or spacing that is necessary to be sure one is practicing sati >as much as is possible. Bhante you replied to me minutes after I sent the message, confess, don't cheat!!! ;-) You are impulsive as I am. A lot more wise but full of ardour the same! Consider that for me being impulsive is not exactly a flaw. I am almost sleeping on the key board by the way but wanted to reply your mail, now I have to give up. I appreciate a lot the text you sent; can I forward it in another list for the benefit of other practitioners? Love, respect, bows and a big ethereal hug Cybele > 6326 From: gayan Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 0:06pm Subject: Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) Yeppers! Always a good reminder... Always sobering..... ALWAYS..... rgds gayan --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob > > --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > dear > Robert E. > > I got around to looking up some details on alcohol. > > In the kuddakatapatha by Buddhaghosa (translated as Minor > > readings PTS by nanamoli). > > there is a comprehensive section ion the precepts. > > on p24 -25 it notes that the blamableness of an action varies > > according to its degree. hence killing a large animal is worse > > than killing an insect because of the degree of effort involved > > and other factors. it has many details. > > there is one interesting part " But unlike killing, drinking is > > always greatly blamable. Why? because it obstructs the ariyan > > Dhamma by inducing even madness in a human being". > > Thanks for this sobering reminder. > > Jon > > > p32 "the fruits of abstaining from the opportunity for > > negilgence due to wine or liquor are such things as quick > > recognition of past, future and present tasks to be done, > > constant establishment of mindfulness, possession of knowledge, > > non-stupidty, non-drivelingness,,,non-confusion, > > non-timorousness, non-presumption, uneviousness, truthfulness, > > freedom from malicious and harsh speech and from gossip, freedom > > from dullness day and night, gratitude, libearlty, possesion of > > conscience, great understanding, rectitude of view, skill in > > distinguishing skill from unskill, and so on"END QUOTE. > > > > robert > > 6327 From: gayan Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 0:23pm Subject: Re: Can we help advance Other Sentient Beings? Dear christine, The answer to your question is a 'YES'. Of course we can help, (and thereby helping ourselves) Sooner or later you will be able to read the story of the brahmin named todeyya. ( A dog is being helped by a human who happened to be the son of the dog's previous human life). And of course there are many stories where non-humans were attracted to the chantings and dhamma preachings, and that causing a better rebirth for them. Commenting for the last part of your post... Of course every being(god,brahma,human etc..) faces the danger of being re-born in lower realms(animals, hell states etc..)unless he/she has attained at least the state of stream-entry. regards gayan --- Christine wrote: > Dear All, > > I subscribe to a number of mailing groups where discussions regarding > sentience occasionally arise. (Currently one group is expressing > views about vegetables and plants being different gradations of > sentience.) Sometimes, the discussion gets bogged down in > vegetarianism vs. meat eating, and how many sentient beings are > harmed with either form of food production. > That is not what I would like your thoughts on..... > > My question is "Is there any way that I can help a non-human > sentient being towards (sooner than otherwise) having a better > rebirth? If the scriptures don't rule it in, do they rule it out?" > > I have a companion animal - Rusty the Dhamma Dog. He is a Great > Dane/Alsatian cross-breed, and came to us as a stray (just for one > night, then if we don't find the owner, he goes to the pound, O.K.? > Yes, Mum) seven years ago. > But I have noticed that when I am listening to the chant of The > Brahma Viharas on Vipassana.com audio files, he comes into the house, > into the Study and puts his head on my lap and seems affected in some > way. He is an 'outside dog' and never comes into a carpeted area at > any other time. This has only started over the last three months. He > is not affected otherwise by T.V., radio or CDs. > > On another list in a discussion ranging over Impermanence and Anatta, > the idea that some beings have memories carried over from a past life > was raised. > Is it possible that hearing the cadence of chants could be helpful in > some way to him, even though he doesn't process the language? > What about seeing statues of the Buddha? > Do those living in Monasteries where animals often are left have any > ideas about this? Are there any folk beliefs even in Buddhist > countries about this? > Buddhists do really believe that any of us could often have a rebirth > as a non-human being, don't we? So I am sure others have wondered > about this before...... > > Regards, > > Christine > (slightly embarrassed, and slightly garbled.) 6328 From: m. nease Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 0:35pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity - Mike Thanks, I do understand your perspective. mike --- Tori Korshak wrote: > > >Dear Cybele, > > > > >Yes but you are depicting a monk who anyway has an > excellent sila what > >prevents his aversion, craving, and delusion to > fully manifest. > >What I understood Tori meant is a monk who has > manifested a lot of dosa and > >therefore becomes incongruent with wisdom, because > his aversion doesn't > >allow him to have a penetrative view of reality and > without insight there is > >no wisdom I suppose. > >The monk is the very model of the Buddha's > teachings and accomplishments for > >the laypeople, the embodiment of Sangha and if he > becomes too wordly, > >meaning delusional and angered it is indeed quite > difficult to trust such a > >person to give you spiritual advice. > > Yes this is what I meant. > > >Personally I don't trust advice from U Pandita > himself because he is such a > >swollenhead, proud, unsympathetic monk that I don't > care about his advices. > >His arrogance precedes him. > >And my past accumulations led me to be quite > responsive to arrogant > >behavior. > >The same doesn't happens with Ajahn Sucitto or > Sumedho for example, I feel > >them quite reliable. > >And many others for that matter. > > > >Metta > > > >Cybele > > > >Many thanks. > > Metta, > Victoria > 6329 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 1:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] A lurker surfaces (again)..... Dear John, Great to have you join in. Very good that you are studying the Abhidhamma - I really believe it is the basis for analysing and dismantling this complex phenomena we call life. Please do ask questions and make comments. If you are wonder about something bring it up- there are probably a hundred other people just as curious about it as you. No question is too basic; as Venerable Dhammapiyo said we are all beginners here. best wishes robert --- John Palmer wrote: > Hello everybody, > > Having followed this fascinating group for around a month the > urge to > participate is finally overcoming my 'Anglo-Saxon reticence' > as my friend > Cybele would say :-) > > 6330 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 1:57pm Subject: putting into practice)wasThe meaning of Equanimity --- Tori Korshak wrote: >Robert: . Even just because it > is > > > >habitual for me to think of kamma and vipaka - cause and > > > effect- > > > >whenever something untoward happens it is natural that > > > >reflection about kamma arises. And that type of > reflection > > > >always comes with equanimity. ________ > > > > > > Victoria:Yes just had this happen when a woman took my parking > space. > > > >_________ > >tell us about your consideration here. It can help others. _______ > > Victoria: Just as you say-seeing the transaction as kamma and vipaka, > equanimity arose. > > > >------------ > > > Robert:Really the whole of the Buddha's teachings condition > > > >equanimity - the more we understand them ____________ Victoria: and put them into practice? > >_______ Robert: I often here this type of comment about putting them into > >practice. It seems that this is what we should do. To me > though > >it seems that understanding itself arises and does its duty > >according to its nature. Rather than putting anything into > >practice what is most helpful is if 'I' get out of the way. > >If someone abuses me, for example, if there is any > understanding > >then there is no bad feeling or wish to react. > >It could be a condition for immediate thinking about kamma > and > >vipaka in which case there is the level of equanimity of that > >level. Or there might be satipatthana, of some degree, which > >knows sound as sound - as simply a dhamma. Then there is no > >reaction, and also no thinking about putting anything into > >practice. > >Once an old boss berated me over some foul up, but at that > time > >I was fascinated with the nature of sound and colour and > seeing > >and was involved with studying these dhammas. I could still > >comprehend what she was saying but it had no untoward effect. > >However, my interest, and lack of worry, must have shown > because > >she suddenly got more angry because of my perceived lack of > >remorse. (When there is equanimity in such situations try not > to > >let the other party know). _________ > >Victoria: Ha! This is very funny ,but I have also seen it defuse > situations. When > there is little reaction, they can cool off quickly too as > long as > equanimity is not (or is not perceived as ) indifference. _________ Right. The benefits carry on too. In past times I had a strong tendency to feel slighted when criticised. So in the case above if there had been no right awareness I probably would have gone the rest of the day thinking "why blame me. I do my best, can't she see how busy I am ......." : just increasing dosa (aversion) and delusion. As it was I rectified the problem happily and had no resentment to my boss; and too continued the day learning a little more about nama (mental phenomena) and rupa(physical phenonemena). I think that is why Acharn sujin says a moment of awareness (of satipatthana) is the most valuable thing. robert 6331 From: Alex Tran Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 1:57pm Subject: Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > My question was, where did ignorance arise once it had arisen? Dear Anders, Is it right that everything happens because of conditions? Ignorance arises because of many different causes, but the most important one is because of the lack of panna (wisdom). Perhaps, your question is more philosophical than I understand it? Metta, AT 6332 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 2:10pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Can we help advance Other Sentient Beings? Dear Christine, Just to add to what Mike and gayan said. There are a number of examples in the tetxs of animals listening to Dhamma. A frog listened to the Buddha - he only knew "this is good" was stepped on and squashed and immediately born in a deva realm. he reflected and saw the cause for his heavenly rebirth- he then went and listened to the Buddha more and became a sotapanna on the same day. In the time of Kassapa Buddha 500 bats lived in a cave which was the home of 2 monks who used to discuss Abhidhamma. They couldn't comprehend the meaning but simply knew "this is good" and so strained their little bat-ears, while hanging by their little batwings, to listen again and again to the discussions. They were reborn in a deva realm and carried on from birth to birth in human and deva worlds until the time of this Buddha where they became monks and students of sariputta. They listened to him teach Abhidhamma and all became arahats. It should be remembered that these bats and the frog had all being human in past lives before they took relinking as bat or frog. And so they had developed understanding and other parami during these times . Now they were animal but their accumulations of merit continued to grow. Howvwer, this is fairly rare - it seems that generally animals don't have many opportunties to make merit (until they take birth as human or deva again). robert --- gayan wrote: > Dear christine, > > The answer to your question is a 'YES'. > Of course we can help, (and thereby helping ourselves) > > Sooner or later you will be able to read the story of the > brahmin > named todeyya. ( A dog is being helped by a human who happened > to be > the son of the dog's previous human life). > > And of course there are many stories where non-humans were > attracted > to the chantings and dhamma preachings, and that causing a > better > rebirth for them. > > Commenting for the last part of your post... > Of course every being(god,brahma,human etc..) faces the danger > of > being re-born in lower realms(animals, hell states > etc..)unless > he/she has attained at least the state of stream-entry. > > regards > gayan > > > > > > --- Christine wrote: > > Dear All, > > > > I subscribe to a number of mailing groups where discussions > regarding > > sentience occasionally arise. (Currently one group is > expressing > > views about vegetables and plants being different gradations > of > > sentience.) Sometimes, the discussion gets bogged down in > > vegetarianism vs. meat eating, and how many sentient beings > are > > harmed with either form of food production. > > That is not what I would like your thoughts on..... > > > > My question is "Is there any way that I can help a > non-human > > sentient being towards (sooner than otherwise) having a > better > > rebirth? If the scriptures don't rule it in, do they rule it > out?" > > > > I have a companion animal - Rusty the Dhamma Dog. He is a > Great > > Dane/Alsatian cross-breed, and came to us as a stray (just > for one > > night, then if we don't find the owner, he goes to the > pound, O.K.? > > Yes, Mum) seven years ago. > > But I have noticed that when I am listening to the chant of > The > > Brahma Viharas on Vipassana.com audio files, he comes into > the > house, > > into the Study and puts his head on my lap and seems > affected in > some > > way. He is an 'outside dog' and never comes into a carpeted > area > at > > any other time. This has only started over the last three > months. > He > > is not affected otherwise by T.V., radio or CDs. > > > > On another list in a discussion ranging over Impermanence > and > Anatta, > > the idea that some beings have memories carried over from a > past > life > > was raised. > > Is it possible that hearing the cadence of chants could be > helpful > in > > some way to him, even though he doesn't process the > language? > > What about seeing statues of the Buddha? > > Do those living in Monasteries where animals often are left > have > any > > ideas about this? Are there any folk beliefs even in > Buddhist > > countries about this? > > Buddhists do really believe that any of us could often have > a > rebirth > > as a non-human being, don't we? So I am sure others have > wondered > > about this before...... > > > > Regards, > > > > Christine > > (slightly embarrassed, and slightly garbled.) > 6333 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 2:25pm Subject: Pali was: (Vakkali-Ray) Great you are making the effort anyway Derek. We need more accurate translations, more commentarial translations. Meeting Jim Anderson has refired my interest in the study of Pali. best wishes robert > > I have 4 years of high-school Latin and 2 years of university > Sanskrit and it's still an effort to learn Pali! > > Best regards, > > Derek. > 6334 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 3:24pm Subject: Speed of falling away (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Dear tadao, The Burmese teacher Thein Nyun in his preface to the DhatuKathu (Pali Text Society)Book of elements) xxvii writes "The elements..arise and cease within a very short time. In the wink of an eye or a flash of lightning the mental elemnts arise and cease a trillion times.`This is just an estimate . the subcommentary takes an even higher figure....." Like many Burmese scholars he doesn't give a reference, except to mention the Anguttara Nikaya, but perhaps Jim or other Pali scholars can find the commentary and Tika where he takes this from. Kom wrote #5838 According to Parichet 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. We see that while we have an idea of the great speed of change it is actually much faster. So I think even one syllable of a word is experienced by many cittas arising in processes. robert --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Robert: > As for the speed of falling, my guess is it is around 10 to 15 > milliseconds. If you have 100 millisecconds, you can access to > the > meanining of a (familiar) word stored in your brain. If a word > is > ambigous (e.g. bank (a river back, and financial bank)), both > of its > meanings are accessed within the first 50 milliseconds of its > presentation, and then a processor (human) chooses the > contextually > correct meaning in the next 50 milliseconds. > Subliminall stimuli can be created if their presentation > last less than 50 milliseconds. In other words, whithin such a > short period of time, we start dwelling on the world of > concepts. > So, those who have keen pa~~nnaa should be able to "see" (in a > figurative > use) the world whose arising and falling should be far shorter > than 50 milliseconds. However, if (perceptual) phenomena arise > and > fall as quickly as you've suggested, how would it be possible > to "perceive" objects. So my guess on the time of > arising/falling > of objects is far shorter than 50 milliseconds but not as > short as, say, > a few milliseconds. Sorry, it's my pure guss. tadao > 6335 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 5:10pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] A lurker surfaces (again)..... John Welcome from me, too. Looking forward to seeing your contributions on the list. Do feel free to make any comments or ask any questions. Jon --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear John, > Great to have you join in. Very good that you are studying the > Abhidhamma - I really believe it is the basis for analysing and > dismantling this complex phenomena we call life. > Please do ask questions and make comments. If you are wonder > about something bring it up- there are probably a hundred other > people just as curious about it as you. No question is too > basic; > as Venerable Dhammapiyo said we are all beginners here. > best wishes > robert > --- John Palmer wrote: > > Hello everybody, > > > > Having followed this fascinating group for around a month the > > urge to > > participate is finally overcoming my 'Anglo-Saxon reticence' > > as my friend > > Cybele would say :-) > > > > > 6336 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 5:40pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Cybele and others, Thank you for all your posts. There are so many I want to reply to (some by you, some by Anders, and otehrs) but don't have enough time. Just some points about formal meditation practice. Today I spent a couple of hours in the forest near my house. I walked and at at a suitable spot sat for awhile. I find this place conducive to consideration of Dhamma. I don't know if you call it formal meditation though. You cite the section on mindfulness of breathing from the satipatthana sutta. Indeed for this object one must take a special posture, one must be in a quiet place. However, this is not one of the objects of samatha I use. It so happens that death and metta and Dhammanusati and Buddhanusati are the types of samatha that seem to suit me. Along with satipatthana. None of these require a special posture to develop. As we read Samyutta Nikaya (translated as Kindred Sayings, P.T.S.) Salayatana Vagga And how monks is a monk composed?* Herein, monks, in his going forth and in his returning a monk acts composedly. In looking in front and looking behind, he acts composedly. In wearing his robe and bearing outer robe and bowl, in eating, drinking, chewing, and tasting he acts composedly. In easing himself, in going, standing, sitting, sleeping, waking, in speaking and keeping silence he acts composedly. Thus, monks, is a monk composed. * composed; in Pali language, sati sampajanna- mindfulness and understanding Make no mistake, if someone wishes to develop mindfulness of breathing he is going to have to be involved in some serious formal meditation. The texts note that this is a difficult subject, not suited for all. In early years I did try this practice and in fact apparently did have some rather exciting periods of concentration. I also developed a lot of attachment to the concentration. I don't say that it can't be developed by others but for myself it seems the objects of the 6 doors are appropriate and beneficial (along with the ways of samatha I just mentioned). I also find the study of the teachings a very strong condition for understanding. On the other hand I know a person or two who are knowledgeable about Dhamma but who seem to have no grasp of the nature of this moment. Sometimes I think the best one could do for them is to lock then in a cave for a year - make them bring to mind their learning for its proper use. Abhidhamma can be a refuge of concepts that distance us from the actual happenings - and I certainly fall into this trap many times. It is good to be reminded of that danger robert --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > > > > But this is not a justification to neglect the formal > practice > >whatsoever. > > Kom: > >What do you mean by formal practice? When people say they > want to > >follow a practice, I often interpret that they mean following > some set of > >taught behaviors and paying attention to certain objects. > > The taught behaviour that you allude to is 'taught' by the > Buddha himself > not any re-elaborated technique inspired on Buddhist > philosophy. > I quote from the Satipathana Sutta literally and you can > verify the > authenticity of my words on the Maha-Satipathana-Sutta being > the 22nd Text > of the Collection of Long Discourses of the Buddha (Digha- > Nikaya, as you I > read the texts even if I am not a fundamentalist. > > "This is the sole way, monks, for the purification of beings, > for the > overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, for the destroying of > pain and grief, > for reaching the right path, for the realization of Nibbana, > namely the Four > Foundations of Mindfulness." > > "What are the Four? Herein (in this teaching) a monk dwells > practising > body-contemplation on the body, ardent, clearly comprehending > and mindful, > having overcome covetousness and grief concerning the world: > he dwells > practising feeling-contemplation on feelings, ardent, etc, > etc: > he dwells practising mind-contemplation on the mind, ardent, > etc...: > He dwells practising mind-object-contemplation on mind-objects > aredent, > clearly......" > > "The contemplation of the Body > > Mindfulness of Breathing > And how , monks does a monk dwell practising > body-contemplation on the body? > Herein, monks, a monk having gone to the forest, to the foot > of a tree, or > to an empty place, sits down cross-legged, keeps his body > erect and his > mindfulness alert. > Just mindful he breathes in and mindful he breathes out....." > > > Well, this is just the beginning of the instructions but as > you can notice > the posture as the mental attitude is all about 'meditation' > as a > fundamental tool to foster awareness and get insights into the > reality of > body, feelings, mind, mental contents. > > I will continue in another mail, this is only to clarify the > source of the > so called instructions about meditation as a mean to develop > insight > contained in the Satipathana Sutta. > > Metta > > Cybele > > 6337 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 4:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Tori > Dear Jon, > No I guess you're right. I wonder if there isn't a world of difference > between the conceptualising that men feel so comfortable with as opposed > to > the more earthy realities women are keen to get to grips with? 'Discouraging', 'conceptualising male', if the cap fits, I'll just have to wear it! But I think this is really another form of the 'intellectual approach vs. practical approach' argument that is often made. Rather than labelling it as one thing or another, it is perhaps more useful to consider exactly what is indicated in the texts. In the Kitagiri Sutta (MN 70) [passage A below], the Buddha explained that the development of the path is gradual and involves in succession listening to someone knowledgeable in the teachings, considering what one has heard, understanding that fully at an intellectual level ("gaining a reflective acceptance") and applying what one has understood. So what many people refer to as their 'practice' is at best only a part of the "gradual training, gradual practice and gradual progress" teaching, each stage of which has its prerequisites and conditions. Nor is this series of gradual steps a once-and-for-all thing. It continues to be the way of progress until final enlightenment. Even the sotapanna needs to keep up the listening and considering [passage B below, same sutta]. Empty conceptualising is not a part of the path. Listening, discussing, considering is forever a necessary part of the path. Tori, I hope you, Cybele and John (and lurkers Alan and Rosanne) enjoy your afternoon with Sarah today. Wish I could be there! Jon A. MLDB translation (p. 582) 22. "Bhikkhus, I do not say that final knowledge is achieved all at once. On the contrary, final knowledge is achieved by gradual training, by gradual practice, by gradual progress. 23. "And how does there come to be gradual training, gradual practice, gradual progress? Here one who has faith [in a teacher] visits him; when he visits him, he pays respect to him; when he pays respect to him, he gives ear; one who gives ear hears the Dhamma; having heard the Dhamma he memorises it; he examines the meaning of the teachings he has memorised; when he examines their meaning, he gains a reflective acceptance of those teachings; when he has gained a reflective acceptance of those teachings, zeal springs up in him; when zeal has sprung up, he applies his will; having applied his will, he scrutinises; having scrutinised, he strives; resolutely striving, he realises with the [mental] body the ultimate truth and sees it by penetrating it with wisdom." B. MLDB translation (p. 580) 11. "Bhikkhus, I so not say of all bhikkhus that they still have work to do with diligence; nor do I say of all bhikkhus that they have no more work to so with diligence. 12. "I do not say of those bhikkhus who are arahants ... and are completely liberated through final knowledge, that they still have work to do with diligence. They have done their work with diligence; they are no more capable of being negligent. 13. "I say of such bhikkhus who are in higher training, whose minds have not yet reached the goal, and who are still aspiring to the supreme security from bondage, that they still have work to do with diligence." 6338 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 6:43pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equanimity) Mike --- "m. nease" wrote: > Since I don't think clinging (upaadaana?) can arise > simultaneously with paññaa, then exactly what is it > that paññaa takes as an object? Is it the > recollection or recognition of clinging? Yes, it is as you conjecture, according to my understanding (but I cannot recall where I got this from -- I will let you know if I find a reference any time). Where the object of sati or panna is a nama, it is necessarily a nama that has just fallen away, so that the nama that is the object and the citta that is the moment of awareness/understanding do not arise simultaneously. However, so rapid is the succession of cittas that the appearance is as if both the awareness/understanding and the nama that is its object appear to be occurring together (this of course assumes a number of moments of each kind of citta). The same would apply also where the object of the sati/panna is a rupa and the sati/panna arises not in the same sense-door process but in a mind-door process following it. > If so, can > recollection or recognition be a foundation of > mindfulness? . You allude, I think, to the fact that the object of sati/panna is always a reality and never a concept. The reality that has just fallen away is not regarded as a concept for this purpose. I think it has to do with the image of the reality being so fresh. Nina or Robert may be able to elaborate on the finer details of this. Jon 6339 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 7:02pm Subject: Re: Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equanimity) Will be most grateful if they do. I was having this conversation with K. Num the other day about "past" and "present" realities that are objects of satipathanna. As "present" is not actually present, but it is more like as if it hadn't fallen away, i.e., there is no way at the beginning level to actually verify that the object of satipathanna has already fallen way, except from the understandings of how things work. On the other hand, A. Santi mentioned in his Pacaya conversation series that past paramatha dhamma, not only its associated concept, can also be an aramana. This twisted question then arises, if Satipatthana is to know the paramatha dhamma as it actually is, can such "recollected" paramatha dhamma be also the object of satipathanna. kom --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > You allude, I think, to the fact that the object of sati/panna is always a > reality and never a concept. The reality that has just fallen away is not > regarded as a concept for this purpose. I think it has to do with the > image of the reality being so fresh. Nina or Robert may be able to > elaborate on the finer details of this. > > Jon 6340 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 7:55pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Cybele, Before we discuss this sutta more (Maha-Satipatthana: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn22.html), let me ask you a few sets of questions: Set 1: Robert, our favorite dhamma friend ========================== 1) Does his recent answer about how "he" practices certify that his practice is formal? He did go to some quiet place, he did contemplate the objects of tranquil meditations, he did walk around (not sure how slowly he walked!), but he did *not* mention that he sat cross-legged and observed the breath. Set 2: Adjuncts of formal practice that is not part of Satipatthana sutta ============================================ 2) As I mentioned my experience in the retreats, they had these components: a) Sitting cross-legged, and "bind" one's attention to the breathing. At this point, although other objects may arise, one "acknowledges" it and then lets it go, and goes back to paying attention to breathing. b) Walking slowly and paying attention to certain things. c) Doing some thing else, but paying attention to certain things. d) No talking during such retreat. a) and c) appear to be in the sutta. b) is in the sutta but there is nowhere that says that one has to walk *slowly*. There is nothing related to d). In the above 4 behaviors, what do you take as the procedures/steps (besides sitting cross-legged and observing the breath) that are necessary to be certified a formal practice? --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > > > I am not alluding to any retreat but to formal ordinary practice as a OK. Formal practice doesn't mean going to a retreat. > >means of mental training to sharpen the mind and weaken defilements. > > >The fact that we apply the very same instructions in daily awareness it > >seems to me just logical. > > > The practice must be a continuum. > > > But this is not a justification to neglect the formal practice > >whatsoever. OK. We need to apply formal practice in our daily life. > The taught behaviour that you allude to is 'taught' by the Buddha himself > not any re-elaborated technique inspired on Buddhist philosophy. By Buddhist philosophy, do you mean the teachings related to the Abhidhamma, or are you just strictly referring to how people in this group go about discussing the phenomena? Do you consider the Abhidhamma to be the teachings of the Buddha? > "This is the sole way, monks, for the purification of beings, for the > overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, for the destroying of pain and grief, > for reaching the right path, for the realization of Nibbana, namely the Four > Foundations of Mindfulness." OK. The Buddha says the 4 foundations of mindfulness (satipatthana) is the only path. > "The contemplation of the Body > > Mindfulness of Breathing > And how , monks does a monk dwell practising body-contemplation on the body? > Herein, monks, a monk having gone to the forest, to the foot of a tree, or > to an empty place, sits down cross-legged, keeps his body erect and his > mindfulness alert. > Just mindful he breathes in and mindful he breathes out....." > > Well, this is just the beginning of the instructions but as you can notice > the posture as the mental attitude is all about 'meditation' as a > fundamental tool to foster awareness and get insights into the reality of > body, feelings, mind, mental contents. Do you consider the sutta to be step-by-step instructions or do you consider it to be general guidance, i.e., that all the steps in the sutta need to be done for the practice to be considered formal? Do you consider some of the steps to be pre-requisite to others, i.e, since step (a) is mentioned before step (b), and therefore, (a) has to be done before (b). > > I will continue in another mail, this is only to clarify the source of the > so called instructions about meditation as a mean to develop insight > contained in the Satipathana Sutta. > I will be awaiting your further explanation of what you consider formal, and additional explanations of the Maha-Satipatthana sutta. As you may have noticed, as soon as you start sprinkling some of the intellectualization into this interaction, your intellectualizing male friends start to follow you like herds ;-). By my estimate, by the time you are finished explaining this sutta, you will be the most popular hot-blooded female in the group. I hope you don't mind this so much... kom 6341 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 8:52pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity (Howard) Howard Many thanks for posting this material, and my apologies for taking some time to get back to you on it. > The following is drawn from Wings to Awakening (from Access to > Insight). I think it is relevant to this discussion. Indeed. But I did not find it particularly easy to follow. Specifically, I got stuck at the point where the author says-- "As such it [equanimity as one of the factors of Awakening (bojjhanga)] can either lead to greater mastery of meditation -- as the purity of mindfulness that accompanies the fourth jhana provides the basis for even more precise analysis of qualities, thus allowing the causal loop to spiral to a higher level -- or else develop into the state of non-fashioning that opens to Awakening." What is your take on this passage? > Particularly interesting > to me is the distinction made between the alleged sutta-perspective and > the abhidhamma-perspective. Yes. The passage in question reads (continuing from the passage quoted above)-- "Abhidhamma texts seem to contradict the point that equanimity feeds back into mindfulness in this way, for they maintain that the factors of Awakening are transcendent -- in other words, that they come into play only as one reaches the point of Awakening, where no temporal feedback would take place. The discourses, however, show that the factors of Awakening can function in the development of mundane concentration as well." It is perhaps unfortunate that the author gives no Abhidhamma reference to check. Again I am puzzled by the terminology. Eg. 'transcendent' as meaning or connoting 'coming into play as one reaches the point of Awakening (where no temporal feedback [??] is possible)'. This makes it difficult for me to say much, unless you can elucidate. Sorry that I cannot contribute anything meaningful at this stage. > You, Jon, I believe, have Abhidhamma as your > main influence? Never really thought of it in those terms. Over the years I have come to realise that the suttas need a knowledge of the Abhidhamma to be understood correctly. But I have never seen myself as a student of the Abhidhamma as such; I just consult one or 2 standard references as and when I want to check something. Jon *************************************************** G. The Seven Factors of Awakening [ Previous Section | Table of Contents | Next Section ] [ Jump down to passages §§92-100 ] The seven factors of Awakening (bojjhanga) are closely related to the practice of the four frames of reference. The texts use two patterns to describe this relationship. The first pattern is a spiral, showing how the seven factors of Awakening build on the four frames of reference [§92]. This point is reflected in the position of mindfulness -- defined as the practice of any one of the four frames of reference -- as the first factor in the list. Discernment, in the role of the analysis of mental qualities into skillful and unskillful, builds on right mindfulness and leads to persistence, which in the form of right effort/exertion maximizes the skillful qualities and minimizes the unskillful ones. This in turn leads to four factors associated with jhana: rapture, serenity, concentration, and equanimity. Equanimity, here, is not a neutral feeling, but rather a balancing or moderation -- an evenness of mind -- with regard to any feeling or object that arises. It is identical with the equanimity in the fourth jhana [§149] and with the inherent equanimity in the fifth factor of five-factored noble concentration [§150], which can develop out of any of the four jhanas. As such it can either lead to greater mastery of meditation -- as the purity of mindfulness that accompanies the fourth jhana provides the basis for even more precise analysis of qualities, thus allowing the causal loop to spiral to a higher level -- or else develop into the state of non-fashioning that opens to Awakening. Abhidhamma texts seem to contradict the point that equanimity feeds back into mindfulness in this way, for they maintain that the factors of Awakening are transcendent -- in other words, that they come into play only as one reaches the point of Awakening, where no temporal feedback would take place. The discourses, however, show that the factors of Awakening can function in the development of mundane concentration as well. Passage §96 shows how the "feeding" of the factors of Awakening is needed to "starve" the hindrances, mental qualities that have to be suppressed before mundane concentration can be attained. Passage §98 shows how the factors function in developing the four attitudes that lead to "release of awareness" -- a mundane form of release -- and indicates the highest state to which those attitudes can lead for one who has penetrated no higher, i.e., who has attained none of the transcendent levels. These passages demonstrate that the factors of Awakening can function on the level of mundane jhana in addition to the level at the verge of Awakening. Thus, equanimity as a factor of Awakening on the mundane plane can feed back into the process of meditation, providing a steady basis for more continuous mindfulness and clearer analysis of mental qualities, until all the factors of the list ripen to transcendence. ********************************************** 6342 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 9:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: . Nibbbana op 13-07-2001 15:12 schreef Derek Cameron op Derek: I don't think anyone has yet mentioned the lines: "There > is, bhikkhus, a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not- > conditioned. If, bhikkhus, there were no not-born, not-brought-to- > being, not-made, not-conditioned, no escape would be discerned from > what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned. But since there is > a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned, > therefore an escape is discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, > made, conditioned" (Udaana VIII.3, repeated at Itivuttaka 43). Dear Derek and all, I am glad you brought up this important text. I have noticed that people might think that nibbana is citta, or even right view which is panna cetasika. In that case nibbana would be conditioned, and there would not be the third noble Truth, no cessation of dukkha. Dukkha is the arising and falling away of conditioned dhammas. Citta experiences an object, it is conditioned by object-condition and several other conditions. Cetasika is conditioned by citta and several other conditions. When the Buddha was the Bodhisatta Sumedha he made the quest for the unconditioned, that which is not dukkha. See the Chronicle of the Buddhas (Buddhava'msa), Sumedha: < Sitting in seclusion I thought thus then:" Again-becoming is dukkha, also the breaking up of the physical frame. Liable to birth, liable to ageing, liable to disease am I then; I will seek the peace that is unageing, undying, secure." In the first book of the Abhidhamma, the Dhammasangani (Buddhist Psychological Ethics) Nibbana is referred to as the unconditioned element, asankhata dhatu (See Appendix II) and it is nama or arupa( non rupa), but it is different from conditioned nama, it does not experience an object. Realities are either nama or rupa, and since nibbana is not rupa it is classified as nama. Kom has explained very clearly about the classification of the four paramattha dhammas. We read in the Atthasalini, Expositor (II, Book II, Part II, Suttanta Couplets, 392) an explanation of nama. Nama is derived from namati, bending towards an object, and it can also be a name. Citta and cetasika bend towards an object, experience an object. And also: they cause one another to bend on to the object: "The four khandhas are name (nama) in the sense of bending, for they bend towards the object. In the sense of causing to bend all (of the foregoing, namely nibbana and the four nama khandhas) are "name" (nama). For the four khandhas cause one another to bend on to the object; and nibbana bends faultless dhammas on to itself by means of the causal relation of the dominant influence of the object." Thus, nibbana does not bend towards an object, it does not experience an object, but, it is predominant object condition for the lokuttara cittas that experience it, it bends them towards itself in that way. Buddhists take their refuge in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the ariyan Sangha. At this moment we do not know what nibbana is like, and it makes no sense to speculate about it. We have confidence that there is a Path leading to the end of dukkha, and that there are people who have realised the third noble Truth by following this Path. We have to learn what dukkha is, the impermanence of nama and rupa. This can only be realized if we study now what nama is and what rupa is, so that their characteristics can be clearly distinguished, there is no other way. I liked what Robert said about awareness, even of attachment to right view, being aware again and again and again of the object at the very moment it appears, so that we come to know its true nature. Nina. 6343 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 9:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup: Sati op 13-07-2001 00:44 schreef Num op Num:> > > About sati (mindfulness), in satipatthana, sati is mindful of nama or rupa as > it appears. I am not clear what does sati be mindful in dana, smatha or > kusula moment which is not vipassana. I definitely did some wholesome deed > before, but sati (as in sati-patthana) did not necessary occur at that > moment, but sati cetasika had to be there, if it really kusala moment ? > Dear Num, when you performed a deed of generosity sure there was sati, since it arises with each kusala citta. Sati was non-forgetful of kusala, did not waste the opportunity for kusala. We may waste many opportunities for kusala, not giving help when help was needed, but when sati arises, it does not waste the opportunity for kusala. But there are many levels of sati, since there are many levels of kusala. >Num: You wrote that :... Mindfulness has "not floating away" as its > characteristic, unforgetfulness as its function, guarding, or the state of > facing the object, as its manifestation, firm remembrance (sanna) or > application in mindfulness as regards the body, etc., as proximate cause. It > should be regarded as a door-post from being firmly established in the > object, and as a doorkeeper from guarding the door of the senses. > ______________________________________________ > > Sati in sati-patthana has character of non floating by being mindful of > paramattha-dhamma at that moment, but sati in general kusala moment does not, > is this correct? So sati in satipatthana cannot have pannatti as its > arammana but sati in general sobhana citta can have pannatti as arammana, > right? Nina: yes, that is right. Nama and rupa are the objects of sati of satipatthana. >Num: Let me also ask about arammana of sati (in sati patthana). Sati can arise > only in kusala moment but can have kusala-, akusala-, vipaka-, kiriya-citta & > cetasika or rupa as arammana. I heard from a CD by Aj.Santi which given to > me by Kom that sati can be mindful of past, present and even future arammana. > In case of past arammana, that arammana is not sampayutta with citta, > cetasika and sati at that moment but being only arammana paccaya. Just > curious, so sati can be mindful of present and past kusula moment in but only > past aramana in panca-dvara. I have no idea about future arammana. Is my > statement valid? I am not clear about this, >Nina: This is not clear to me. When sati is mindful of seeing, seeing has fallen away, but when it has just fallen away, its characteristic can be realized as a nama. The same for dosa that can be object of awareness. The question is, how far past is past. But sati that is mindful of a nama or rupa is not arising together with that nama or rupa, not sampayutta, it arises in a following process. Sampayutta refers only to citta and cetasikas arising together. Sati is also used in the sense of recollection of what is past, even past lives. In fact there are many aspects of sati, referred to in the co. to the Milinda Panha. You may reflect with sati on the past, and at that moment there can be the realization that it is nama that reflects. So many different cittas, very intricate. I have not heard that tape, therefore this is not clear to me. Rupa of the past and rupa of the future can be objects, though. Lets be aware of what appears now. I quote Acharn Sujin, from the conversations in Cambodia: < The development of satipaììhåna is the development of paññå, and there should not be an idea of self who intends to do something particular in order to induce paññå. Then there is no sati which is aware of the characteristic of the dhamma that naturally arises and appears at this moment because of the appropriate conditions. Someone who does not have understanding of satipaììhåna may ask, while he is seeing naturally, what he should do in order to have sati. It is not the right practice if someone wishes to do something particular in order to have sati, because nobody can cause the arising of any reality. People can listen to the Dhamma, they can investigate, consider and understand what they hear, so that they will know that the dhamma appearing at this moment is real, and that it appears through one doorway at a time. Therefore, it is necessary to have more understanding about the realities appearing one at a time through each of the doorways. At this moment, for example, an object is appearing through the eyes and thus, it can be seen. However, if there is no citta, no reality or element that experiences something, thus, a reality which sees the object that appears, that object cannot appear. If someone sees naturally but he does not realize the distinction between the characteristic of the object that appears and the reality that sees, vipassanå, insight, is not being developed. Therefore, the only thing people can do is listening to the Dhamma so that they understand correctly that seeing at this moment is only a kind of reality, a dhamma. One should listen, investigate and consider what one hears, so that one can gradually understand that there are only realities, no self. Dhammas are real, they are beyond control, they arise naturally because of their appropriate conditions. When you are listening at this moment, sati arises, but it may not yet be satipaììhåna. It may be sati of the level of listening and considering, but in that way there will gradually be more understanding.> Best wishes, Nina. 6344 From: m. nease Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 11:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] putting into practice)wasThe meaning of Equanimity Dear Robert, --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > In past times I > had a strong > tendency to feel slighted when criticised. So in the > case above > if there had been no right awareness I probably > would have gone > the rest of the day thinking "why blame me. I do my > best, can't > she see how busy I am ......." : just increasing > dosa (aversion) > and delusion. This really reminded me of Ven. Thanissaro's notes to Sakkapañhasutta, with some interesting links: 1. Complication = papañca. The tendency of the mind to proliferate issues from the sense of "self." This term can also be translated as self-reflexive thinking, reification, falsification, distortion, elaboration, or exaggeration. In the discourses, it is frequently used in analyses of the psychology of conflict. The categories of complication stem from the self-reflexive thought, "I am the thinker," (see Sn IV.14), and include the categories of inappropriate attention (see MN 2): being/not-being, me/not-me, mine/not-mine, doer/done-to. The perceptions of complication include such thoughts as "This is me. This is mine. This is my self." These perceptions and categories turn back on the person who allows them to proliferate, giving rise to internal conflict & strife, which then expand outward. For more on these terms, see MN 18. [Go back] http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn21.html#n1 mike 6345 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 0:05am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Jon, This is really excellent--I think you should add it to the files for future reference. I'm certainly adding your quotations to my own 'toolbox'. mike --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Tori > > > Dear Jon, > > No I guess you're right. I wonder if there isn't a > world of difference > > between the conceptualising that men feel so > comfortable with as opposed > > to > > the more earthy realities women are keen to get to > grips with? > > 'Discouraging', 'conceptualising male', if the cap > fits, I'll just have to > wear it! > > But I think this is really another form of the > 'intellectual approach vs. > practical approach' argument that is often made. > Rather than labelling it > as one thing or another, it is perhaps more useful > to consider exactly > what is indicated in the texts. In the Kitagiri > Sutta (MN 70) [passage A > below], the Buddha explained that the development of > the path is gradual > and involves in succession listening to someone > knowledgeable in the > teachings, considering what one has heard, > understanding that fully at an > intellectual level ("gaining a reflective > acceptance") and applying what > one has understood. > > So what many people refer to as their 'practice' is > at best only a part of > the "gradual training, gradual practice and gradual > progress" teaching, > each stage of which has its prerequisites and > conditions. > > Nor is this series of gradual steps a > once-and-for-all thing. It > continues to be the way of progress until final > enlightenment. Even the > sotapanna needs to keep up the listening and > considering [passage B below, > same sutta]. > > Empty conceptualising is not a part of the path. > Listening, discussing, > considering is forever a necessary part of the path. > > Tori, I hope you, Cybele and John (and lurkers Alan > and Rosanne) enjoy > your afternoon with Sarah today. Wish I could be > there! > > Jon > > A. > MLDB translation (p. 582) > 22. "Bhikkhus, I do not say that final knowledge is > achieved all at once. > On the contrary, final knowledge is achieved by > gradual training, by > gradual practice, by gradual progress. > > 23. "And how does there come to be gradual > training, gradual practice, > gradual progress? Here one who has faith [in a > teacher] visits him; when > he visits him, he pays respect to him; when he pays > respect to him, he > gives ear; one who gives ear hears the Dhamma; > having heard the Dhamma > he memorises it; he examines the meaning of the > teachings he has > memorised; when he examines their meaning, he gains > a reflective > acceptance of those teachings; when he has gained a > reflective acceptance > of those teachings, zeal springs up in him; when > zeal has sprung up, he > applies his will; having applied his will, he > scrutinises; having > scrutinised, he strives; resolutely striving, he > realises with the > [mental] body the ultimate truth and sees it by > penetrating it with > wisdom." > > B. > MLDB translation (p. 580) > 11. "Bhikkhus, I so not say of all bhikkhus that > they still have work to > do with diligence; nor do I say of all bhikkhus > that they have no more > work to so with diligence. > > 12. "I do not say of those bhikkhus who are > arahants ... and are > completely liberated through final knowledge, that > they still have work to > do with diligence. They have done their work with > diligence; they are > no more capable of being negligent. > > 13. "I say of such bhikkhus who are in higher > training, whose minds have > not yet reached the goal, and who are still aspiring > to the supreme > security from bondage, that they still have work to > do with diligence." > > > > 6346 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 0:06am Subject: How We Can Help Advance Other Sentient Beings? Dear Christine How are you? I agree with what Mike, Gayan and Robert said. I just want to add a few points from another perspective. It seems that animals respond, and are sensitive, to human attitudes and behaviors. If we treat them with healthy minds and behaviors, they can understand and simulate them. This is a clue to how we can help advance them. If we could help them generate healthy minds (kusala cittani) and behaviors in them, they could accumulate good deeds. When they die with these good deeds (kusala kamma), they could have a very high chance of being reborn in higher lifeforms. Healthy minds and good deeds, regardless of the sources from which they come, will culminate in better results and better life- froms. Hope this helps satisfy your curiosity. With regards Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear Christine, > Just to add to what Mike and gayan said. > There are a number of examples in the tetxs of animals listening > to Dhamma. A frog listened to the Buddha - he only knew "this is > good" was stepped on and squashed and immediately born in a deva > realm. he reflected and saw the cause for his heavenly rebirth- > he then went and listened to the Buddha more and became a > sotapanna on the same day. > In the time of Kassapa Buddha 500 bats lived in a cave which was > the home of 2 monks who used to discuss Abhidhamma. They > couldn't comprehend the meaning but simply knew "this is good" > and so strained their little bat-ears, while hanging by their > little batwings, to listen again and again to the discussions. > They were reborn in a deva realm and carried on from birth to > birth in human and deva worlds until the time of this Buddha > where they became monks and students of sariputta. They listened > to him teach Abhidhamma and all became arahats. > It should be remembered that these bats and the frog had all > being human in past lives before they took relinking as bat or > frog. And so they had developed understanding and other parami > during these times . Now they were animal but their > accumulations of merit continued to grow. > Howvwer, this is fairly rare - it seems that generally animals > don't have many opportunties to make merit (until they take > birth as human or deva again). > robert > --- 243059114056127132062026203056129208071 wrote: > > Dear christine, > > > > The answer to your question is a 'YES'. > > Of course we can help, (and thereby helping ourselves) > > > > Sooner or later you will be able to read the story of the > > brahmin > > named todeyya. ( A dog is being helped by a human who happened > > to be > > the son of the dog's previous human life). > > > > And of course there are many stories where non-humans were > > attracted > > to the chantings and dhamma preachings, and that causing a > > better > > rebirth for them. > > > > Commenting for the last part of your post... > > Of course every being(god,brahma,human etc..) faces the danger > > of > > being re-born in lower realms(animals, hell states > > etc..)unless > > he/she has attained at least the state of stream-entry. > > > > regards > > gayan > > > > > 6347 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 0:28am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equanimity) Thanks, Jon, --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > You allude, I think, to the fact that the object of > sati/panna is always a > reality and never a concept. Right-- > The reality that has > just fallen away is not > regarded as a concept for this purpose. I think it > has to do with the > image of the reality being so fresh. Nina or Robert > may be able to > elaborate on the finer details of this. I hope so--this seems a crucial point to me as a demarcation between what can and can't condition insight. mike 6348 From: Howard Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 8:51pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Eq... Hi, Kom - In a message dated 7/15/01 7:03:28 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Kom T writes: > On the other hand, A. Santi mentioned in his Pacaya conversation series > that past paramatha dhamma, not only its associated concept, can also be > an aramana. This twisted question then arises, if Satipatthana is to know > the paramatha dhamma as it actually is, can such "recollected" paramatha > dhamma be also the object of satipathanna. > ========================== This sounds illogical to me. While a *memory* of the basic dhamma may be available, and the *concept* which generalizes it, neither of these is the original dhamma. This sounds to me more like a Sarvastivadin view, a kind of eternalist view, than a Theravadin one. (BTW, the Sarvastivadin school, with its "all exists" view, is the main school which the Tibetan Buddhists (if not others) have in mind when they use the disparaging term 'hinayana'.) 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) 6349 From: Howard Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 9:17pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Hi, Jon - In a message dated 7/15/01 7:06:23 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > Where the object of sati or panna is a nama, it is necessarily a nama that > has just fallen away, so that the nama that is the object and the citta > that is the moment of awareness/understanding do not arise simultaneously. > However, so rapid is the succession of cittas that the appearance is as > if both the awareness/understanding and the nama that is its object appear > to be occurring together (this of course assumes a number of moments of > each kind of citta). > --------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: This is something I do not "get". The "citta theory" would seem to imply that if the "object" of a citta is gone, then all that can be the *current* object is a (very fresh) *memory* of the just-fallen object,and not the no-longer-existing object, itself. Also, when you say "However, so rapid is the succession of cittas that the appearance is as if both the awareness/understanding and the nama that is its object appear to be occurring together (this of course assumes a number of moments of each kind of citta).", I would have to ask *where* that deluded appearance of the simultaneity of the occurrence of an object and the awareness of the object occurs. In yet another mind moment? The more I examine the "momentary theory of cittas", a kind of ksanavada (sp?) theory similar to that of the Sautrantikas, the more problems seem to arise, at least within my limited capacity. (Kalupahana finds difficulties with it as well, BTW.) It seems to me that at least some level of direct knowing occurs at a trans-citta level, if, indeed, separate, discrete moments of knowing are a reality. As I understand it, the notion of 'bhavangacitta' was a later commentarial one established for the express purpose of serving as a "fix" for non-continuity issues arising with the discrete-citta view. [The Sautrantikas, on the other hand, didn't adopt that, but simply allowed for gaps between cittas, adopting a "film-frame" view similar to that of Hume so many years later.] --------------------------------------------------------------- > The same would apply also where the object of the sati/panna is a rupa and > the sati/panna arises not in the same sense-door process but in a > mind-door process following it. > > > If so, can > > recollection or recognition be a foundation of > > mindfulness? . > > You allude, I think, to the fact that the object of sati/panna is always a > reality and never a concept. The reality that has just fallen away is not > regarded as a concept for this purpose. I think it has to do with the > image of the reality being so fresh. Nina or Robert may be able to > elaborate on the finer details of 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) 6350 From: Howard Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 10:48pm Subject: Some Additional Thoughts on: Reply to: Sati/panna and its object Hi again, Jon - In a message dated 7/15/01 1:17:50 PM Eastern Daylight Time, I quoted you: > > >> Where the object of sati or panna is a nama, it is necessarily a nama that >> has just fallen away, so that the nama that is the object and the citta >> that is the moment of awareness/understanding do not arise simultaneously. >> However, so rapid is the succession of cittas that the appearance is as >> if both the awareness/understanding and the nama that is its object appear >> to be occurring together (this of course assumes a number of moments of >> each kind of citta). >> and then I replied: > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > This is something I do not "get". The "citta theory" would seem to > imply that if the "object" of a citta is gone, then all that can be the > *current* object is a (very fresh) *memory* of the just-fallen object, and > not the no-longer-existing object, itself. Also, when you say "However, so > rapid is the succession of cittas that the appearance is as if both the > awareness/understanding and the nama that is its object appear to be > occurring together (this of course assumes a number of moments of each kind > of citta).", I would have to ask *where* that deluded appearance of the > simultaneity of the occurrence of an object and the awareness of the object > occurs. In yet another mind moment? > The more I examine the "momentary theory of cittas", a kind of > ksanavada (sp?) theory similar to that of the Sautrantikas, the more > problems seem to arise, at least within my limited capacity. (Kalupahana > finds difficulties with it as well, BTW.) It seems to me that at least some > level of direct knowing occurs at a trans-citta level, if, indeed, > separate, discrete moments of knowing are a reality. As I understand it, > the notion of 'bhavangacitta' was a later commentarial one established for > the express purpose of serving as a "fix" for non-continuity issues arising > with the discrete-citta view. [The Sautrantikas, on the other hand, didn't > adopt that, but simply allowed for gaps between cittas, adopting a > "film-frame" view similar to that of Hume so many years later.] > --------------------------------------------------------------- > The following also occurs to me: Nina has written in "Cetasikas" that "There is only one citta at a time, cognizing one object, and each citta is accompanied by several cetasikas which also experience the same object, but which each perform their own function while they assist the citta in cognizing that object. They arise and fall away together with the citta." Moreover, sati is one of the cetasikas. Thus, the object of sati, when it occurs, is the very same object as the citta along with which which that instance of sati occurs. So, if the object of mindfulness is a mental one, it is the very same one that the citta discerns. If the object is a *previous* entire citta or any cetasika of such a citta, then, indeed, that is actually no longer existent, and, thus, the actual object can only be a memory. A citta, then, can never take itself, or any aspect of itself, as object. But at any given time, there is only one citta. All past cittas are gone. So a mental object, an object of the mind door, is never available for direct observation. In that case, why call such objects ultimate realities? In fact, what leads us to think there even are such things, inasmuch as they are not directly observable? Do you see that there are some difficulties here? 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) 6351 From: Larry Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 2:56am Subject: pali/abhidhamma question Greetings, I posted the following question, slightly expanded here, to another group and someone sent me here. I think what I am looking for is a commentary that would elaborate on the particular passage in question although another sutta reference would be interesting, if there is one: This is about the Mahasatipatthana Sutta. I was reading Nyanaponika Thera's "The Heart Of Buddhist Meditation" the other day and was struck by a passage towards the end in the section on the cause of suffering in the Four Noble Truths in the mindfulness of mind objects section. It runs, slightly abridged, thus: "But where does this craving arise and take root? Wherever in the world there are delightful and pleasurable things, there this craving arises and takes root. Eye, ear, etc. are delightful and pleasurable: there this craving arises and takes root. Visual forms, sounds, etc. are delightful and pleasurable: there this craving arises and takes root. Eye consciousness, ear consciousness ... (the corresponding sixfold) contact--the feeling born of that sixfold contact--the sixfold will (for visual forms, etc.)--the sixfold craving--the sixfold thought-conception (concerning visual forms, etc.)--the sixfold discursive thought: these are delightful and pleasurable: there this craving takes root." Apologies for the abridgement. I was wondering if anyone can tell me where I might find more on this sequence (sense, sense object, sense consciousness, contact, feeling, will, craving, concept, discursive thought). Can this tell us something about the 12 links of dependent arising? I'm particularly interested in how "will" arises between feeling and craving and the development of concept and discursive thought after craving is also interesting. What does "will (for visual forms)" mean in this cntext? Also what is the pali for "will" in this text and is it related to "sankhara". Maurice Walshe's and Thanissaro Bhikkhu's translations each differ in significant ways. Is there an "orthodox" version? thanks for any help, Larry 6352 From: Howard Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 11:07pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity (Howard) Hi, Jon - In a message dated 7/15/01 8:53:10 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > Howard > > Many thanks for posting this material, and my apologies for taking some > time to get back to you on it. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Certainly no apology at all called for! -------------------------------------------------- > > > The following is drawn from Wings to Awakening (from Access to > > Insight). I think it is relevant to this discussion. > > Indeed. But I did not find it particularly easy to follow. Specifically, > I got stuck at the point where the author says-- > > "As such it [equanimity as one of the factors of Awakening (bojjhanga)] > can either lead to greater mastery of meditation -- as the purity of > mindfulness that accompanies the fourth jhana provides the basis for even > more precise analysis of qualities, thus allowing the causal loop to > spiral to a higher level -- or else develop into the state of > non-fashioning that opens to Awakening." > > What is your take on this passage? > ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Well, I suppose it has more poetry than precision! ;-)) I think that the point is that the non-reactivity fostered by equanimity at the level of the 4th jhana results in greater clarity and enhanced mindfulness. ------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Particularly interesting > > to me is the distinction made between the alleged sutta-perspective and > > the abhidhamma-perspective. > > Yes. The passage in question reads (continuing from the passage quoted > above)-- > > "Abhidhamma texts seem to contradict the point that equanimity feeds back > into mindfulness in this way, for they maintain that the factors of > Awakening are transcendent -- in other words, that they come into play > only as one reaches the point of Awakening, where no temporal feedback > would take place. The discourses, however, show that the factors of > Awakening can function in the development of mundane concentration as > well." > > It is perhaps unfortunate that the author gives no Abhidhamma reference to > check. Again I am puzzled by the terminology. Eg. 'transcendent' as > meaning or connoting 'coming into play as one reaches the point of > Awakening (where no temporal feedback [??] is possible)'. This makes it > difficult for me to say much, unless you can elucidate. ------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, I, not even knowing the tip of the Abhidhammic iceberg, am certainly in no position to shed much light on this. It seems he might be saying that the seven enlightenment factors are "lokuttara-only" from the Abhidhammic point of view, and that there is no temporality at that level. Whether this is actually the Abhdhammic take on the matter is something about which I have no idea. ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Sorry that I cannot contribute anything meaningful at this stage. > > > You, Jon, I believe, have Abhidhamma as your > > main influence? > > Never really thought of it in those terms. Over the years I have come to > realise that the suttas need a knowledge of the Abhidhamma to be > understood correctly. But I have never seen myself as a student of the > Abhidhamma as such; I just consult one or 2 standard references as and > when I want to check something. ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, you certainly seem to have learned one helluva lot from those two references! ;-)) --------------------------------------------------------- > > Jon > =========================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 6353 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 5:35am Subject: Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex Dear group Today despite the unpredictable English weather, we had a nice, inviting Sunday and I went to meet Sarah who is visiting her mother in Sussex and to catch up with other English and not only members of the list that came over as well. Let me tell you first thing how cute is this countryside place where Sarah's mother, by the way a delightful lady, who prepared us an exquisite afternoon tea with sandwiches and cakes (lobha, lobha, lobha!!!!). Good gracious the village looks like a description from the pages of one of Jane Austen's books, very picturesque, in this quiet, beautiful, typical English countryside with these very nice cottages. The atmosphere in Sarah's mother's house was so intimate and hospitable. I felt so literary!!! Sarah has been a perfect hostess, very warm and friendly. We linked up together with John Palmer, Tori and son Alex (very interesting guy ;-), Alan Weller (Zolag's webmaster), a nice American couple, and a couple of friends, expats from Hong Kong also interested in Buddhism. We spent some time enjoying the beautiful garden of Kate, Sarah's mother and afterwards being the weather a bit unstable (what a novelty in England!) we moved inside in this cozy living room and had our tea, me a coffee naturally, with this delicious home-made cakes, hhmmmm and we chatted pleasantly about Dhamma, about our cyber friends, about our trips, Khun Sujin, Sarah's hippie period, my eternal post hippie period, etc, etc. Sarah accompanied us for a short walk in the village and I saw the most graceful 'post office' I have ever seen in my life, so cute. It was a wonderful afternoon, I enjoyed so much meeting in real life with Sarah and re-uniting with other friends I have met previously through Sarah in London, apart Tori that was an off list friend of mine already. But so strange and comforting I felt like we had already confidence after so many sharings in the list. I wish to thank you Sarah again for such a pleasant afternoon and your warm hospitality (my regards to your mother, she has been so kind with me) and I hope that we can link up again in Hong Kong and/or Bangkok, once I return to Asia by choice or because John has kicked me out of his house by exhaustion, poor man after all he is not a sotapanna and coping with me is a demanding task. But you are accumulating many merits, John, consider this perspective!!! Don't desist! Perhaps I should move in with Anders or Robert, they are well equipped to stand up to me! ;-) Love Cybele 6354 From: ppp Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 10:46pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Speed of falling away (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Hi, Robert: Obviously, naaamas fall away faster than ruupas since a ruupa can be an object of (at least) sevaral cittas. Hence, you may be right. Araising and falling of phenomenan could be much shorter than 10 or 15 milliseconds. But a thing which lasts only 10 or so milliseconds is beyond our ordinary comprehension. Hopefully, our sati can one day become sharp enough to expericne such an event. tadao 6355 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 6:27am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Speed of falling away (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Dear Tadao, Since hearing of all this I've always assumed that (assuming it's all true), sati, as a naama, arises and subsides as quickly as other naamas, so experiences them already and needn't become sharper in the future. If this is correct, ordinary comprehension comprehends sati in the same way that it comprehends, say, dosa--that is, a concept is formed and recognized retrospectively from a very great many series of naamas in rapid succession (very similar because of very similar conditions). So if this is true, ordinary comprehension does comprehend these maybe in the way that it comprehends sound vibrations or light waves also too rapid and brief to comprehend (singly)--that is, as notes or chords, or colors. This still doesn't explain, though, how after they've subsided from the other sense-doors, these ruupas (in the latter examples) are comprehended, even instantaneously, through the mind-door--unless as recollections, concepts. Immensely glad to have you on this list. mike --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Robert: > Obviously, naaamas fall away faster than ruupas > since > a ruupa can be an object of (at least) sevaral > cittas. Hence, you > may be right. Araising and falling of phenomenan > could be much shorter > than 10 or 15 milliseconds. But a thing which lasts > only > 10 or so milliseconds is beyond our ordinary > comprehension. > Hopefully, our sati can one day become sharp enough > to expericne > such an event. tadao 6356 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 6:29am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equanimity) Dear Mike, Just as Jon said. The object of satipatthana , if it is nama, has always just passed away but because of the incredible speed of the arise and fall we still call it insighting the present moment. Any paramattha dhamma can be an object - and this includes grasping(upadana). robert --- "m. nease" wrote: > Thanks, Jon, > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > You allude, I think, to the fact that the object of > > sati/panna is always a > > reality and never a concept. > > Right-- > > > The reality that has > > just fallen away is not > > regarded as a concept for this purpose. I think it > > has to do with the > > image of the reality being so fresh. Nina or Robert > > may be able to > > elaborate on the finer details of this. > > I hope so--this seems a crucial point to me as a > demarcation between what can and can't condition > insight. > > mike > > 6357 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 6:37am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equanimity) Dear Robert, --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear Mike, > Just as Jon said. The object of satipatthana , if it > is nama, > has always just passed away but because of the > incredible speed > of the arise and fall we still call it insighting > the present > moment. Any paramattha dhamma can be an object - and > this > includes grasping(upadana). Thanks for this confirmation of Jon's comment. Why do you mention upaadaana in particular? Thanks (again) in advance, mike 6358 From: ppp Date: Sun Jul 15, 2001 11:39pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Speed of falling away (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Hi, Mike: Sorry Mike, I cannot answer you last question now. I have to think about it carefully. But the notion of speed doesn't possbily mean anything when a sanmaa sati sees a thing as it is. Possibly, "how fast or how slow" is an argument based on our/putujana's speculation, and when a sati sees a thing, the notion of time doesn't play any role. Currently, many physists have been working on to synthsize a few independent theories which work beaufitully only they are applied independently: to name a few, quantam(?spelling?) theory, and Enstain's(?spelling?) theory. These theories are based on the assumption that we live in the 4-D world (i.e. 3-D + time). A/the latest theory is that our world is more like 12 dimentional (11 spacial dimentions + a time dimention). If it is the case, then,the notion of "time" has less significance than we give a credit to. For Arahatas, I guess, the question of "how fast or how slow" may possibly mean nothing. And if you put the very question to Archaan Sujin, she would probably say as follows: without worrying about how fast naamas and ruupas arise and fall away, why do you not develop the right understanding so that (it is not self but) sati will see things as they are. Also we have to remember that the first satage of pa~~nnaa doesn't see the arising and falling away of things, but can (only) see that naamas and ruupas differ from each other. tadao 6359 From: Derek Cameron Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 7:23am Subject: Re: pali/abhidhamma question Larry, The word that Nyanapoinka Thera translates as "will" is sañcetanaa. As you know, Maurice Walshe renders it as "volition" and Thanissaro Bhikkhu has "intention." The other translation I have is the VRI one where it's translated as "mental reaction." The PED defines it as "though, cogitation, perception, intention." It would be interesting to know what the commentaries day. Derek. 6361 From: Larry Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 0:32pm Subject: Re: pali/abhidhamma question Sorry about that last message, here it is again: Derek wrote: Larry, The word that Nyanapoinka Thera translates as "will" is sañcetanaa. As you know, Maurice Walshe renders it as "volition" and Thanissaro Bhikkhu has "intention." The other translation I have is the VRI one where it's translated as "mental reaction." The PED defines it as "though, cogitation, perception, intention." It would be interesting to know what the commentaries day. Derek. ------------------ Thanks Derek, I wonder if sancetanaa is a synonym with sankhara? Larry 6362 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 2:06pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex Thank you, cybele. A very nice description, it sounds like everyone was thoroughly decent, nice chaps. Splendid. --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > 6363 From: Tori Korshak Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 4:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Jon, We really missed you! It was wonderful all meeting up at Sarah's mother's charming rose-covered cottage. Even the weather held and we were able to sit in the garden (for a while). I see what you mean about aspects of the Path (my comments were meant to be light-hearted, not personal remarks, and also inquiries into stereotypes). Yes of course both intellectual effort is required as well as application, otherwise why am I reading all these books? I suppose it is finding the balance (the middle way?) that is always a challenge. Thank you for the Sutta reference-very helpful. Metta, Victoria At 04:53 PM 7/15/01 +0800, you wrote: >Tori > > > Dear Jon, > > No I guess you're right. I wonder if there isn't a world of difference > > between the conceptualising that men feel so comfortable with as opposed > > to > > the more earthy realities women are keen to get to grips with? > >'Discouraging', 'conceptualising male', if the cap fits, I'll just have to >wear it! > >But I think this is really another form of the 'intellectual approach vs. >practical approach' argument that is often made. Rather than labelling it >as one thing or another, it is perhaps more useful to consider exactly >what is indicated in the texts. In the Kitagiri Sutta (MN 70) [passage A >below], the Buddha explained that the development of the path is gradual >and involves in succession listening to someone knowledgeable in the >teachings, considering what one has heard, understanding that fully at an >intellectual level ("gaining a reflective acceptance") and applying what >one has understood. > >So what many people refer to as their 'practice' is at best only a part of >the "gradual training, gradual practice and gradual progress" teaching, >each stage of which has its prerequisites and conditions. > >Nor is this series of gradual steps a once-and-for-all thing. It >continues to be the way of progress until final enlightenment. Even the >sotapanna needs to keep up the listening and considering [passage B below, >same sutta]. > >Empty conceptualising is not a part of the path. Listening, discussing, >considering is forever a necessary part of the path. > >Tori, I hope you, Cybele and John (and lurkers Alan and Rosanne) enjoy >your afternoon with Sarah today. Wish I could be there! > >Jon > >A. >MLDB translation (p. 582) >22. "Bhikkhus, I do not say that final knowledge is achieved all at once. > On the contrary, final knowledge is achieved by gradual training, by >gradual practice, by gradual progress. > >23. "And how does there come to be gradual training, gradual practice, >gradual progress? Here one who has faith [in a teacher] visits him; when >he visits him, he pays respect to him; when he pays respect to him, he >gives ear; one who gives ear hears the Dhamma; having heard the Dhamma >he memorises it; he examines the meaning of the teachings he has >memorised; when he examines their meaning, he gains a reflective >acceptance of those teachings; when he has gained a reflective acceptance >of those teachings, zeal springs up in him; when zeal has sprung up, he >applies his will; having applied his will, he scrutinises; having >scrutinised, he strives; resolutely striving, he realises with the >[mental] body the ultimate truth and sees it by penetrating it with >wisdom." > >B. >MLDB translation (p. 580) >11. "Bhikkhus, I so not say of all bhikkhus that they still have work to >do with diligence; nor do I say of all bhikkhus that they have no more >work to so with diligence. > >12. "I do not say of those bhikkhus who are arahants ... and are >completely liberated through final knowledge, that they still have work to >do with diligence. They have done their work with diligence; they are >no more capable of being negligent. > >13. "I say of such bhikkhus who are in higher training, whose minds have >not yet reached the goal, and who are still aspiring to the supreme >security from bondage, that they still have work to do with diligence." > > 6364 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 5:30pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Tori --- Tori Korshak wrote: > Dear Jon, > > We really missed you! It was wonderful all meeting up at Sarah's > mother's > charming rose-covered cottage. Even the weather held and we were able to > > sit in the garden (for a while). I'm glad it worked out well. > I see what you mean about aspects of the Path (my comments were meant to > be > light-hearted, not personal remarks, and also inquiries into > stereotypes). And that's exactly how they came across (I think Sarah may have misinterpreted my brief telephone report on the ongoing posts - she is not able to get access on a daily basis). > Yes of course both intellectual effort is required as well as > application, > otherwise why am I reading all these books? I suppose it is finding the > balance (the middle way?) that is always a challenge. That about sums it up! > Thank you for the Sutta reference-very helpful. > > Metta, > Victoria You're welcome, Tori. Jon > At 04:53 PM 7/15/01 +0800, you wrote: > >Tori > > > > > Dear Jon, > > > No I guess you're right. I wonder if there isn't a world of > difference > > > between the conceptualising that men feel so comfortable with as > opposed > > > to > > > the more earthy realities women are keen to get to grips with? > > > >'Discouraging', 'conceptualising male', if the cap fits, I'll just have > to > >wear it! > > > >But I think this is really another form of the 'intellectual approach > vs. > >practical approach' argument that is often made. Rather than labelling > it > >as one thing or another, it is perhaps more useful to consider exactly > >what is indicated in the texts. In the Kitagiri Sutta (MN 70) [passage > A > >below], the Buddha explained that the development of the path is > gradual > >and involves in succession listening to someone knowledgeable in the > >teachings, considering what one has heard, understanding that fully at > an > >intellectual level ("gaining a reflective acceptance") and applying > what > >one has understood. > > > >So what many people refer to as their 'practice' is at best only a part > of > >the "gradual training, gradual practice and gradual progress" teaching, > >each stage of which has its prerequisites and conditions. > > > >Nor is this series of gradual steps a once-and-for-all thing. It > >continues to be the way of progress until final enlightenment. Even > the > >sotapanna needs to keep up the listening and considering [passage B > below, > >same sutta]. > > > >Empty conceptualising is not a part of the path. Listening, > discussing, > >considering is forever a necessary part of the path. > > > >Tori, I hope you, Cybele and John (and lurkers Alan and Rosanne) enjoy > >your afternoon with Sarah today. Wish I could be there! > > > >Jon > > > >A. > >MLDB translation (p. 582) > >22. "Bhikkhus, I do not say that final knowledge is achieved all at > once. > > On the contrary, final knowledge is achieved by gradual training, by > >gradual practice, by gradual progress. > > > >23. "And how does there come to be gradual training, gradual practice, > >gradual progress? Here one who has faith [in a teacher] visits him; > when > >he visits him, he pays respect to him; when he pays respect to him, he > >gives ear; one who gives ear hears the Dhamma; having heard the > Dhamma > >he memorises it; he examines the meaning of the teachings he has > >memorised; when he examines their meaning, he gains a reflective > >acceptance of those teachings; when he has gained a reflective > acceptance > >of those teachings, zeal springs up in him; when zeal has sprung up, > he > >applies his will; having applied his will, he scrutinises; having > >scrutinised, he strives; resolutely striving, he realises with the > >[mental] body the ultimate truth and sees it by penetrating it with > >wisdom." > > > >B. > >MLDB translation (p. 580) > >11. "Bhikkhus, I so not say of all bhikkhus that they still have work > to > >do with diligence; nor do I say of all bhikkhus that they have no more > >work to so with diligence. > > > >12. "I do not say of those bhikkhus who are arahants ... and are > >completely liberated through final knowledge, that they still have work > to > >do with diligence. They have done their work with diligence; they > are > >no more capable of being negligent. > > > >13. "I say of such bhikkhus who are in higher training, whose minds > have > >not yet reached the goal, and who are still aspiring to the supreme > >security from bondage, that they still have work to do with diligence." > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > 6365 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 8:48pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex Dear Robert AAHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!(I am shouting...) You are a desperate case of chronic anglosaxon fever! :-)))))) After all my enthusiastic description of a lovely afternoon with Sarah and all the dhamma friends you comment..."sounds like everyone was thoroughly decent, nice chaps." SOL!! - I just invented this new code that is for [shouting out loud] and time to time I will apply with you from now on! ;-))))) Apart jokes Rob, people was lovely and I most enjoyed meeting everybody, the sense of togetherness, the warmth of Sarah and her mother (by the way Jon, Sarah's mother while chatting in the kitchen with me, commented 'did you meet Jon? Very nice chap, really nice!' - seems your prestige is going up in Sussex!). Hope we will promote more meetings when it is possible. Love Cybele 6366 From: Derek Cameron Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 8:47pm Subject: Re: pali/abhidhamma question > I wonder if sañcetanaa is a synonym with sankhaara? Larry, What an interesting question. I've never thought about it before. Here's my attempt at an answer. Yes, sañcetanaa is derived from the prefix sa.m + cetanaa. The prefix is an intensifier. It emphasizes the active (i.e., volitional) aspect of cetanaa -- mental reactions as actions, the mental equivalent of physical kamma. Sankhaara varies in meaning depending on the context. In the context of dependent origination sankhaara comes between ignorance (avijjaa) and consciousness (viññaa.na). So here it is a kind of mental predisposition or tendency. I think it was Baba Hari Das who once said: "When a pick-pocket looks at a saint, he sees only pockets." In other words, our mental predispositions influence what perceive. However, in other contexts (e.g. the five aggregates), the meaning of sankhaara seems to be broader, and includes the manifestation of these tendencies in actual mental contents. It's sometimes translated as "volitional formations." So, the short answer is -- yes, I think sañcetanaa and sankhaara are very closely related, if not synonyms. But perhaps someone else has a better answer than me? Derek. 6367 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 9:21pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: pali/abhidhamma question Thanks for this Derek, I don't know much about the difference between cetana and sancetana but this link gives an explanation of cetana that is worth reading too: http://www.dhammastudy.com/cetasikas6.html robert --- Derek Cameron wrote: > > I wonder if sañcetanaa is a synonym with sankhaara? > > Larry, > > What an interesting question. I've never thought about it > before. > Here's my attempt at an answer. > > 6368 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 9:40pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex Cybele, Really your report was much appreciated and I read it with joy and interest. I'll try to give as nice a one when I get to bangkok; unfortunately no doubt with typical anglosaxon impassivity. I too like it if we have more face to face meetings. much thanks robert --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > Dear Robert > > AAHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!(I am shouting...) > You are a desperate case of chronic anglosaxon fever! :-)))))) > After all my enthusiastic description of a lovely afternoon > with Sarah and > all the dhamma friends you comment..."sounds like everyone was > thoroughly > decent, nice chaps." > !). > Hope we will promote more meetings when it is possible. > > 6369 From: Tori Korshak Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 9:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex Robert and Cybele, We can't help it that we have these Anglo-Saxon accumulations! By the way, in my experience, many A-S are pretty out of control with their emotional displays as well-so much for stereotypes! Metta, Victoria At 06:40 AM 7/16/01 -0700, you wrote: >Cybele, >Really your report was much appreciated and I read it with joy >and interest. I'll try to give as nice a one when I get to >bangkok; unfortunately no doubt with typical anglosaxon >impassivity. I too like it if we have more face to face >meetings. >much thanks >robert >--- cybele chiodi wrote: > > > > Dear Robert > > > > AAHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!(I am shouting...) > > You are a desperate case of chronic anglosaxon fever! :-)))))) > > After all my enthusiastic description of a lovely afternoon > > with Sarah and > > all the dhamma friends you comment..."sounds like everyone was > > thoroughly > > decent, nice chaps." > > !). > > Hope we will promote more meetings when it is possible. > > > > 6370 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 10:22pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex Dear Tori and Robert > >Robert and Cybele, > >We can't help it that we have these Anglo-Saxon accumulations! Indeed as I can't help but being an 'ebullient' Latin. But actually my best friends are all anglosaxons! ;-) Suppose because hot and cool together result in 'warm', the Middle WAY!!! >By the way, in my experience, many A-S are pretty out of control with their >emotional displays as well-so much for stereotypes! I agree and I suppose it is due to too much suppression. LOve Cybele > >Metta, >Victoria > > >At 06:40 AM 7/16/01 -0700, you wrote: > >Cybele, > >Really your report was much appreciated and I read it with joy > >and interest. I'll try to give as nice a one when I get to > >bangkok; unfortunately no doubt with typical anglosaxon > >impassivity. I too like it if we have more face to face > >meetings. > >much thanks > >robert 6371 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 10:30pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > >By the way, in my experience, many A-S are pretty out of > control with their > >emotional displays as well-so much for stereotypes! > > I agree and I suppose it is due to too much suppression. > Ha ha, very quick Cybele 6372 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 10:43pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equanimity) Any paramattha dhamma can be an object - and > > this > > includes grasping(upadana). > > Thanks for this confirmation of Jon's comment. Why do > you mention upaadaana in particular? > > Thanks (again) in advance, Just referring back to your earlier point: "Since I don't think clinging (upaadaana?) can arise > simultaneously with paññaa," ________ On this issue to when we talk about moments we should rememeber the various conditions such as anataraya - paccaya (proximity condition)and other conditions. The present moment is conditioned by the preceeding moment by this condition (not to mention other conditions) . It is not that when we talk about moments arising and passing away that they are totally discrete little packages (it can sound that way but this is not what is meant in the Abhidhamma). This is thoroughly explained in the Patthana, the last book of the Abhidhamma. best wishes robert > 6373 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 10:56pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex Rob > >--- cybele chiodi wrote: > > > >By the way, in my experience, many A-S are pretty out of > > control with their > > >emotional displays as well-so much for stereotypes! > > > > I agree and I suppose it is due to too much suppression. >Ha ha, very quick Cybele Can't lose a chance you know! ;-) Love Cybele 6374 From: Num Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 7:19pm Subject: Abhidhamma translation(Thai) by Archan Somporn Dear DSG members, http://www.rajabhat.ac.th/budd/index.htm K.Amara has asked me to forward this link to dsg members, but the bottom-line is it is in Thai. It's a translation and commentary of Abhidhamma in Pali and Thai by Archan Somporn in Acrobat Reader format. Best wishes, Num _________________________________________________________ > Khun Pracheun at the foundation has just told me that Acharn Somporn's > son has collected all of his father's translations and added them to > an educational site, at this URL: > > > Anumodana in your studies, > > Amara > > > All the articles and books in the light green window are Thai > translations mainly of the Abhidhamma, plus related commentaries. The > last article in the box, (no. 3) is the abhidhamma handbook called > 'dhammapadasangaha', as I read it. > > A. 6375 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 11:59pm Subject: Sankhara = Cetana Re: pali/abhidhamma question Dear Larry Bidd How are you? In an effort to answer your questions, first I went to Mahasatipatthana Suttam in Mulapannasa, Majjimanikaya, and then its commentary which asked me to go to Samudaya Sacca section in Vissudhimagga, which asked me to go to Paticcasamuppada section. Most of your questions are answered in Section 587 in Visuddhimagga under Pannyabhuminiddeso. First, Pali term for "will" is sancetana in Mahasatipatthana, which becomes sankhara in Paticcasamuppada. Both are then described as merely cetana as found in Abhidhamma. As Buddhaghosa put it, "te sabbepi lokiyakusalaakusalacetanamattameva honti". "All those are merely the worldly, healthy and unhealthy cetanas." So there is a definite connection between sancetana in Mahasatipatthana Suttam and sankhara in the 12 links of dependent arising. You asked: "I'm particularly interested in how "will" arises between feeling and craving and the development of concept and discursive thought after craving is also interesting." According to Dhammasangani, those mental components arise simulataneouly. However, in Paticcasamuppada, some of them may act as conditions for others of them. But, even there, which follows which depends on circumstances. You should consult Section 582 in Visuddhimagga under Pannyabhuminiddeso for detailed discussion. You asked: "What does "will (for visual forms)" mean in this cntext?" I think you are asking how "will" can participate in visual consciousness. If it were the case, we can witness translation of cetana as "will", "intention" and the like is not adequate, even misleading. The best way is to go to Atthasalini and read thoroughly how Buddhaghosa defined cetana and his similies for cetana. The more I read Atthalini, the more I get the impression that cetana could mean mobilisation. This is my preferred rendering - particularly in this context. Well, mobilisation (cetana) in visual consciousness should now make sense better than will or intention. Visual consciousness needs mobilisation which could facilitate better focus so as to get a clear sight. I hope this message gives you very orthodox Theravada answers for your questions. With regards, Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- Larry wrote: > Greetings, > > I posted the following question, slightly expanded here, to another > group and someone sent me here. I think what I am looking for is a > commentary that would elaborate on the particular passage in question > although another sutta reference would be interesting, if there is one: > > This is about the Mahasatipatthana Sutta. I was reading Nyanaponika > Thera's "The Heart Of Buddhist Meditation" the other day and was struck > by a passage towards the end in the section on the cause of suffering in > the Four Noble Truths in the mindfulness of mind objects section. It > runs, slightly abridged, thus: > > "But where does this craving arise and take root? Wherever in the world > there are delightful and pleasurable things, there this craving arises > and takes root. > Eye, ear, etc. are delightful and pleasurable: there this craving arises > and takes root. > Visual forms, sounds, etc. are delightful and pleasurable: there this > craving arises and takes root. > Eye consciousness, ear consciousness ... (the corresponding sixfold) > contact--the feeling born of that sixfold contact--the sixfold will (for > visual forms, etc.)--the sixfold craving--the sixfold thought- conception > (concerning visual forms, etc.)--the sixfold discursive thought: these > are delightful and pleasurable: there this craving takes root." > Apologies for the abridgement. I was wondering if anyone can tell me > where I might find more on this sequence (sense, sense object, sense > consciousness, contact, feeling, will, craving, concept, discursive > thought). Can this tell us something about the 12 links of dependent > arising? I'm particularly interested in how "will" arises between > feeling and craving and the development of concept and discursive > thought after craving is also interesting. What does "will (for visual > forms)" mean in this cntext? Also what is the pali for "will" in this > text and is it related to "sankhara". Maurice Walshe's and Thanissaro > Bhikkhu's translations each differ in significant ways. Is there an > "orthodox" version? > > thanks for any help, Larry 6376 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 0:01am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Rob and Kom - part 1 Dear Robert and all > >Dear Cybele and others, >Thank you for all your posts. There are so many I want to reply >to (some by you, some by Anders, and others) but don't have >enough time. You don't have much time for me, I feel rejected! :-(((( I am a fragile, defenceless woman and you ill treat me...hehehehehehe >Just some points about formal meditation practice. Today I spent >a couple of hours in the forest near my house. I walked and at >at a suitable spot sat for awhile. I find this place conducive >to consideration of Dhamma. I don't know if you call it formal >meditation though. I call formal meditation when we reckon a precise intention to practice a kind of mental training in order to sharpen our mind and increase the skills of awareness to support right understanding of reality, deepening the knowledge of your mental processes (in my case using the four foundations of mindfulness as a tool) to refine our capacity of getting insights into the phenomena, observing their arising and passing away, characteristics, etc without being entangled but maintaining as much as possible detachment avoiding strain or 'control' and using the breath just as an anchor to grasp and return when you stray from concentration and paying attention to don't cling to anything. But observing without being judgemental body, sensations, mind and mental contents (hindrances) with a penetrative view accepting whatever comes and acknowledging it. The penetrative view is developed through bare attention, manasikara as a device to reach an stage where you practice Sukkha-Vipassana or bare insight meditation. The mental training aims to develop concentration and insight and the calmness is a by product of this skill of recognizing and coping with reality not using conceptual thought that can be deceptive and lead to mental proliferation or papanca. That it is what I call Vipassana meditation and what I practice in order to be grounded in reality and foster awareness. I am not interested in absorptions or raptures of any kind, I had far enough Samatha when I used to practice yoga meditation in India (serious stuff, better remark because yoga is becoming very much synonimous of easy new age commodities). >You cite the section on mindfulness of breathing from the >satipatthana sutta. Indeed for this object one must take a >special posture, one must be in a quiet place. However, this is >not one of the objects of samatha I use. It so happens that >death and metta and Dhammanusati and Buddhanusati are the types >of samatha that seem to suit me. Along with satipatthana. None >of these require a special posture to develop. It's not a question of posture in the physical sense as much as a question of mental posture, meaning a natural purposelfulness. The physical posture just helps to keep the body and mind stable in order to 'facilitate' this contemplation of the chosen objects. But you can do it whether standing, sitting, walking or lying down. Death and metta are included in Vipassana, on feelings, mind and mental contents observation when it arises and is dhammavicaya - investigation of the Dhamma all the same. Regarding the quiet place, is also only an option of appropriate conditions for the mental training whether to avoid distractions but is not compulsory. Where could we find an actual quiet place in our usual urban environments so noisy and disrupting - the noise and disruption are only more subjects to observe. Living in Asia, particularly in India I have developed a high tolerance to noise. I can't realize the difference on your objects of contemplation - it must be necessarily all included in body, sensations, mind, mental objects field and the aim is to infer in Dukkha, Anicca and Anatta. Mind you I practice Vipassana not Anapanasati. Anyway Rob what is Dhamma above all: wholesome 'appreciation' of Buddha's teachings through proper investigation of Mind-objects(mental contents) and Phenomena(bodily and mental processes). Kayanupassana Vedananupassana Cittanupassana Dhammanupassana If this is not nama rupa for you... We must not overlook that Buddha himself declared Satipatthana as Ekayano maggo - the sole and only WAY to deliverance being the direct or straight path. And formal meditation is included in the instructions in the Satipatthana Sutta. Sound and clear: don't suppose it's my imagination. Am I deluded on this issue? It is what I aim to clarify. Love Cybele 6377 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 0:10am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Rob and Kom - part 1 Dear Robert and all > >Dear Cybele and others, >Thank you for all your posts. There are so many I want to reply >to (some by you, some by Anders, and others) but don't have >enough time. You don't have much time for me, I feel rejected! :-(((( I am a fragile, defenceless woman and you ill treat me...hehehehehehe >Just some points about formal meditation practice. Today I spent >a couple of hours in the forest near my house. I walked and at >at a suitable spot sat for awhile. I find this place conducive >to consideration of Dhamma. I don't know if you call it formal >meditation though. I call formal meditation when we reckon a precise intention to practice a kind of mental training in order to sharpen our mind and increase the skills of awareness to support right understanding of reality, deepening the knowledge of your mental processes (in my case using the four foundations of mindfulness as a tool) to refine our capacity of getting insights into the phenomena, observing their arising and passing away, characteristics, etc without being entangled but maintaining as much as possible detachment avoiding strain or 'control' and using the breath just as an anchor to grasp and return when you stray from concentration and paying attention to don't cling to anything. But observing without being judgemental body, sensations, mind and mental contents (hindrances) with a penetrative view accepting whatever comes and acknowledging it. The penetrative view is developed through bare attention, manasikara as a device to reach an stage where you practice Sukkha-Vipassana or bare insight meditation. The mental training aims to develop concentration and insight and the calmness is a by product of this skill of recognizing and coping with reality not using conceptual thought that can be deceptive and lead to mental proliferation or papanca. That it is what I call Vipassana meditation and what I practice in order to be grounded in reality and foster awareness. I am not interested in absorptions or raptures of any kind, I had far enough Samatha when I used to practice yoga meditation in India (serious stuff, better remark because yoga is becoming very much synonimous of easy new age commodities). >You cite the section on mindfulness of breathing from the >satipatthana sutta. Indeed for this object one must take a >special posture, one must be in a quiet place. However, this is >not one of the objects of samatha I use. It so happens that >death and metta and Dhammanusati and Buddhanusati are the types >of samatha that seem to suit me. Along with satipatthana. None >of these require a special posture to develop. It's not a question of posture in the physical sense as much as a question of mental posture, meaning a natural purposelfulness. The physical posture just helps to keep the body and mind stable in order to 'facilitate' this contemplation of the chosen objects. But you can do it whether standing, sitting, walking or lying down. Death and metta are included in Vipassana, on feelings, mind and mental contents observation when it arises and is dhammavicaya - investigation of the Dhamma all the same. Regarding the quiet place, is also only an option of appropriate conditions for the mental training whether to avoid distractions but is not compulsory. Where could we find an actual quiet place in our usual urban environments so noisy and disrupting - the noise and disruption are only more subjects to observe. Living in Asia, particularly in India I have developed a high tolerance to noise. I can't realize the difference on your objects of contemplation - it must be necessarily all included in body, sensations, mind, mental objects field and the aim is to infer in Dukkha, Anicca and Anatta. Mind you I practice Vipassana not Anapanasati. Anyway Rob what is Dhamma above all: wholesome 'appreciation' of Buddha's teachings through proper investigation of Mind-objects(mental contents) and Phenomena(bodily and mental processes). Kayanupassana Vedananupassana Cittanupassana Dhammanupassana If this is not nama rupa for you... We must not overlook that Buddha himself declared Satipatthana as Ekayano maggo - the sole and only WAY to deliverance being the direct or straight path. And formal meditation is included in the instructions in the Satipatthana Sutta. Sound and clear: don't suppose it's my imagination. Am I deluded on this issue? It is what I aim to clarify. Love Cybele 6378 From: Joe Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 0:29am Subject: Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! This theory, too, was addressed in the book I referred to, which examined Theravada as thoroughly or even more thoroughly than others (although of course even Theravada is hardly unitary in such conceptions). As I recall the conclusions were the same, ie the mind- moments, citta, whatever you choose to call it, were considered ill- defined by the standards of modern western logic/philsophy/science. Again, this is not something I find to be a problem but it bothers some rationalists. Joe --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Joe: > "Mind" or "Conciousness" is not well defined in the > Theravada Buddhism, simply because from the Buddhist view > point, there is no "mind" or "conciousness" which we can > regard as an " entity". From the viewpoint of the Theravada > Buddhism, each moment of experince is A mind, which may > probably not last more than 10 or 15 milliseconds. Another mind will > follow the previoius mind, experiencing either the same > or different object (through the same or different door > way). So, there is no mind or conciousness which can be > located in one's body. In the stream of the moment-to-moment > experiences, in fact, we cannot "find" not only mind/conciousness > but a person who houses it. > Since there is no mind which we can be defined as an entity in > a conventional sense, the Theravada Buddhists do not get into the > (Western) philosophical disuccion of the nature of mind/conciousness. > tadao 6379 From: m. nease Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 0:42am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equanimity) Thansk, Robert, Thanks, I'd already forgotten. Maybe it's thinking of them as 'discrete little packages' that's my problem. 'Proximity condition' could certainly be key in this regard. I'd be interested to hear anything from the Patthana if you can find the time. I see that Wisdom Books has a two-volume translation for £66.95 at http://www.wisdombooks.org/abhid.html --are you familiar with this, or aware of any others? Thanks again, mike --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > > Any paramattha dhamma can be an object - and > > > this > > > includes grasping(upadana). > > > > Thanks for this confirmation of Jon's comment. > Why do > > you mention upaadaana in particular? > > > > Thanks (again) in advance, > > Just referring back to your earlier point: "Since I > don't think > clinging (upaadaana?) can arise > > > simultaneously with paññaa," > ________ > On this issue to when we talk about moments we > should rememeber > the various conditions such as anataraya - paccaya > (proximity > condition)and other conditions. The present moment > is > conditioned by the preceeding moment by this > condition (not to > mention other conditions) . > It is not that when we talk about moments arising > and passing > away that they are totally discrete little packages > (it can > sound that way but this is not what is meant in the > Abhidhamma). > This is thoroughly explained in the Patthana, the > last book of > the Abhidhamma. > best wishes > robert > > 6380 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 0:45am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Rob and Kom - part 1 Dear Cybele, It seems we are pretty much in agreement. One aspect of the four foundations of mindfulness that should be well reflected on is that if it is the correct awareness it is grinding away the sense of self. In the satipatthana sutta:"Gacchanto va gacchamiti pajanati "When he is going (a bhikkhu) understands: 'I am going.')" The commentary: "In this matter of going, readily do dogs, jackals and the like, know when they move on that they are moving. But this instruction on the modes of deportment was not given concerning similar awareness, because awareness of that sort belonging to animals does not shed the belief in a living being, does not knock out the percept of a soul, and neither becomes a subject of meditation nor the development of the Arousing of Mindfulness." ENDQUOTE Even we feel non-judgemental but there can still be a veiled idea that "I" am having bare awareness. I think we shouldn't underestimate the importance of learning about the deep aspects of the Dhamma . By this I mean knowing about the khandas (five aggregates) or other classifications of realities- and other teachings. We are used to taking what are only momentary phenomena as a whole and so we confuse concept and reality. Right awareness is supported by these details. Sati is a conditioned phenomena and sati of the eightfold path, which is satipatthana, arises only through the right conditions (see, for instance, the kitagiri sutta that jon mentioned yesterday)- it cannot arise simply because we intend to have it. robert --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > Dear Robert and all > > > > >Dear Cybele and others, > >Thank you for all your posts. There are so many I want to > reply > >to (some by you, some by Anders, and others) but don't have > >enough time. > > > You don't have much time for me, I feel rejected! :-(((( > I am a fragile, defenceless woman and you ill treat > me...hehehehehehe > > > >Just some points about formal meditation practice. Today I > spent > >a couple of hours in the forest near my house. I walked and > at > >at a suitable spot sat for awhile. I find this place > conducive > >to consideration of Dhamma. I don't know if you call it > formal > >meditation though. > > > I call formal meditation when we reckon a precise intention to > practice a > kind of mental training in order to sharpen our mind and > increase the skills > of awareness to support right understanding of reality, > deepening the > knowledge of your mental processes (in my case using the four > foundations of > mindfulness as a tool) to refine our capacity of getting > insights into the > phenomena, observing their arising and passing away, > characteristics, etc > without being entangled but maintaining as much as possible > detachment > avoiding strain or 'control' and using the breath just as an > anchor to grasp > and return when you stray from concentration and paying > attention to don't > cling to anything. > But observing without being judgemental body, sensations, mind > and mental > contents (hindrances) with a penetrative view accepting > whatever comes and > acknowledging it. > The penetrative view is developed through bare attention, > manasikara as a > device to reach an stage where you practice Sukkha-Vipassana > or bare insight > meditation. > The mental training aims to develop concentration and insight > and the > calmness is a by product of this skill of recognizing and > coping with > reality not using conceptual thought that can be deceptive and > lead to > mental proliferation or papanca. > That it is what I call Vipassana meditation and what I > practice in order to > be grounded in reality and foster awareness. > I am not interested in absorptions or raptures of any kind, I > had far enough > Samatha when I used to practice yoga meditation in India > (serious stuff, > better remark because yoga is becoming very much synonimous of > easy new age > commodities). > > > >You cite the section on mindfulness of breathing from the > >satipatthana sutta. Indeed for this object one must take a > >special posture, one must be in a quiet place. However, this > is > >not one of the objects of samatha I use. It so happens that > >death and metta and Dhammanusati and Buddhanusati are the > types > >of samatha that seem to suit me. Along with satipatthana. > None > >of these require a special posture to develop. > > > It's not a question of posture in the physical sense as much > as a question > of mental posture, meaning a natural purposelfulness. > The physical posture just helps to keep the body and mind > stable in order to > 'facilitate' this contemplation of the chosen objects. > But you can do it whether standing, sitting, walking or lying > down. > Death and metta are included in Vipassana, on feelings, mind > and mental > contents observation when it arises and is dhammavicaya - > investigation of > the Dhamma all the same. > Regarding the quiet place, is also only an option of > appropriate conditions > for the mental training whether to avoid distractions but is > not compulsory. > Where could we find an actual quiet place in our usual urban > environments so > noisy and disrupting - the noise and disruption are only more > subjects to > observe. > Living in Asia, particularly in India I have developed a high > tolerance to > noise. > > I can't realize the difference on your objects of > contemplation - it must be > necessarily all included in body, sensations, mind, mental > objects field and > the aim is to infer in Dukkha, Anicca and Anatta. > Mind you I practice Vipassana not Anapanasati. > Anyway Rob what is Dhamma above all: wholesome 'appreciation' > of Buddha's > teachings through proper investigation of Mind-objects(mental > contents) and Phenomena(bodily and mental processes). > Kayanupassana > Vedananupassana > Cittanupassana > Dhammanupassana > If this is not nama rupa for you... > > We must not overlook that Buddha himself declared Satipatthana > as Ekayano > maggo - the sole and only WAY to deliverance being the direct > or straight > path. > And formal meditation is included in the instructions in the > Satipatthana > Sutta. > Sound and clear: don't suppose it's my imagination. > Am I deluded on this issue? It is what I aim to clarify. > > Love > > Cybele > 6381 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 0:59am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equanimity) Thanks for the link Mike. I have both volumes - and very good they are too (trans. by Narada thera of burma). I guess you have read Nina's Conditions available as a free download from www.zolag.co.uk (150 page introduction to the Patthana) She writes very clearly but I remember the first time I read this book was on a plane leaving Thailand 10 years ago. I read the whole thing and understood preety much nothing (so I know how those bats felt). I kept on rereading it along with Narada's translation and it became clearer. The Patthana is as close as one gets to knocking out the perception of self without actual direct experience. And of course it naturally encourages more direct investigation. Actually, I remember back in triple gem days one of your first letters to me asked if I could write a little more about the Patthana (not a common request- hence my recall). Thanks for the reminder and I will try to flavour some future posts with it. robert --- "m. nease" wrote: > Thansk, Robert, > > Thanks, I'd already forgotten. Maybe it's thinking of > them as 'discrete little packages' that's my problem. > 'Proximity condition' could certainly be key in this > regard. > > I'd be interested to hear anything from the Patthana > if you can find the time. I see that Wisdom Books has > a two-volume translation for £66.95 at > > http://www.wisdombooks.org/abhid.html > > --are you familiar with this, or aware of any others? > > Thanks again, > > mike > > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > wrote: > > > > Any paramattha dhamma can be an object - and > > > > this > > > > includes grasping(upadana). > > > > > > Thanks for this confirmation of Jon's comment. > > Why do > > > you mention upaadaana in particular? > > > > > > Thanks (again) in advance, > > > > Just referring back to your earlier point: "Since I > > don't think > > clinging (upaadaana?) can arise > > > > > simultaneously with paññaa," > > ________ > > On this issue to when we talk about moments we > > should rememeber > > the various conditions such as anataraya - paccaya > > (proximity > > condition)and other conditions. The present moment > > is > > conditioned by the preceeding moment by this > > condition (not to > > mention other conditions) . > > It is not that when we talk about moments arising > > and passing > > away that they are totally discrete little packages > > (it can > > sound that way but this is not what is meant in the > > Abhidhamma). > > This is thoroughly explained in the Patthana, the > > last book of > > the Abhidhamma. > > best wishes > > robert > > > 6382 From: Num Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 1:03am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup: Sati Dear Nina and all, Thanks for your comments and sorry for the unclear message. I re- listened to Aj.Santi CD again. There is no date mentioned on the CD, so I could not tell when was the talk but it's about Patthana. Let me summarized again, Arammana-paccaya for citta and cetasika can be past, present, future or even kala-vimutti (pannatti and nibbhana) arammana. He said that all five khandhas can be past-, present- and future arammana-paccaya for the PRESENT citta. He said that the future khandha can be arammana for present citta in case of anakataga-nana. For sati, from my understanding can be mindful to the "just fallen away" reality which being function as arammana paccaya for the citta and cetasikas which sati co-arises at that moment. The arammana of citta and cetasika as I mentioned can be kala dependent (past, present and future) or kala-vimutti. But sati can mindful to citta or cetasika (nama) of the previous citta and cetasikas which just has fallen away and now function as arammana- paccaya for present mindful citta, no longer as a sampayutta-paccaya. In case of rupa, which lasts longer that citta and cetasika. It can be atthi-paccaya as well as arammana-paccaya for sati. Please do comment and correct me at any points. I am not clear about it. It's hard to ask and explain a question by writing. Thanks for your reminding about sati by Archan Sujin, from the conversation in Cambodia. I will keep on studying. Appreciate, Num 6383 From: John Palmer Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 3:11am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] A lurker surfaces (again)..... Dear Robert, Thanks for the warm welcome... I am starting to work through Abhidhamma in Daily Life with Cybele tonight. This should be interesting :-) If my brain doesn't explode overnight I hope to start posting the odd question.... Metta John -----Original Message----- From: Robert Kirkpatrick Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] A lurker surfaces (again)..... Dear John, Great to have you join in. Very good that you are studying the Abhidhamma - I really believe it is the basis for analysing and dismantling this complex phenomena we call life. Please do ask questions and make comments. If you are wonder about something bring it up- there are probably a hundred other people just as curious about it as you. No question is too basic; as Venerable Dhammapiyo said we are all beginners here. best wishes robert --- John Palmer wrote: > Hello everybody, > > Having followed this fascinating group for around a month the > urge to > participate is finally overcoming my 'Anglo-Saxon reticence' > as my friend > Cybele would say :-) > > 6384 From: Num Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 11:17pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sankhara = Cetana Re: pali/abhidhamma question Hi Derek, Larry and Suan: Please pardon me, I think I have never said proper hello to you before. So this time I did. If you can look at Summary of Paramatthadhamma Part II in Chapter 12 at: http://www.dhammastudy.com/paramat2citta12.html Here is a short cut and paste from the chapter. ______________________________________________ “The word sankhara in the Tipitaka has several meanings comprising 1 sankhara-dhamma. 2 sankhara-khandha. 3 abhisankhara. 4 asankharika and sasankharika. Sankhara-dhamma is the reality that arises because of paccaya or conditions composing it. When it arises it falls away.Sankhara-dhamma are not permanent. They arise only the shortest instant and then fall away completely. Sankhara-dhamma are namely citta, cetasika and rupa.†Abhisankrara is cetana cetasika and here is the explanation. ….“The meaning of sankhara-dhamma is more comprehensive than sankhara-khandha because citta, cetasika and rupa are all sankhara- dhamma while only the 50 cetasika are sankhara-khandha. And out of the 50 cetasika, which are sankhara-khandha, only cetana-cetasika is abhisankhara. In the paticcasamuppada, avijja is paccaya for sankhara, sankhara is paccaya for vinnana etc. Sankhara in the paticcasamuppada means cetana-cetasika, which is abhisankhara, the supreme composing reality, or kusala-kamma, or akusala-kamma which would result in vipaka-citta and -cetasika. Even though other cetasika also condition citta to arise such as phassa-cetasika. Without phassa-cetasika, which is a reality that comes into contact with arammana, there can be no citta that sees, hears, smells, tastes, knows bodysense contact or thinks. But phassa-cetasika is still not abhisankhara because it only comes into contact with arammana and then is gone. “ ….. Num 6385 From: John Palmer Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 3:19am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] A lurker surfaces (again)..... Jon, Thanks for the welcome. Lovely to meet Sarah and the crew yesterday.......they are such welcoming people. I'm starting to go full steam ahead with Abhdidhamma in Daily Life. I may be gone some time .....:-) Regards John -----Original Message----- From: Jonothan Abbott Sent: 15 July 2001 10:11 Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] A lurker surfaces (again)..... John Welcome from me, too. Looking forward to seeing your contributions on the list. Do feel free to make any comments or ask any questions. Jon --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear John, > Great to have you join in. Very good that you are studying the > Abhidhamma - I really believe it is the basis for analysing and > dismantling this complex phenomena we call life. > Please do ask questions and make comments. If you are wonder > about something bring it up- there are probably a hundred other > people just as curious about it as you. No question is too > basic; > as Venerable Dhammapiyo said we are all beginners here. > best wishes > robert > --- John Palmer wrote: > > Hello everybody, > > > > Having followed this fascinating group for around a month the > > urge to > > participate is finally overcoming my 'Anglo-Saxon reticence' > > as my friend > > Cybele would say :-) > > 6386 From: John Palmer Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 3:25am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Loving kindness for a friend Dear Cybele, I will of course join you in sending Metta to our Dhamma-friend tomorrow. I hope anyone else meditating tomorrow will do so too - this person has given so much of their life to transmission of the Dhamma. Metta John -----Original Message----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: 14 July 2001 02:56 Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Loving kindness for a friend >>Dear group >> >>I have a special appeal to make: I came to know this evening about a dear >>friend of mine, a commited buddhist and a lovely human being >>who has to >>undergoe by-pass surgery next week. >>He is going to be admitted in hospital on Monday and surgery is planned to >>Wednesday morning Asian time. >>I am concerned with him and wish I could be there to help. >>But I can't at least not physically. My heart sure will be there, close to >>this friend. >>I would like to make an appeal to whoever believe in the power of Metta >>and is in goodwill to concentrate on this person and send him >>healing >>vibrations of loving kindness. >>I am very grateful if you feel like collaborating in this mind-heart >>sinergy to give strenght to another human who is in a >>difficult moment >>joining this metta meditation. >>Thank you very much for your interest and consideration. >> >>Metta-Karuna >> >>Cybele >> 6387 From: Ken Howard Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 6:27am Subject: Hello dsg Hello DhammaStudyGroup My name is Ken Howard, I am a fifty-year-old Australian who has been lurking on this excellent list for the past seven or eight months. In that time, I have learned more than in all of my previous twenty- six years as a Dhamma student. I am posting this message, partly to say thank you for your invaluable guidance and partly to explain my lurking behaviour. What a big mistake it was to think (for twenty-six years), that a knowledge of the Abhidhamma was not important - let alone vitally important. You (dsg) put me straight on that and, along with your related web sites, you are making the study of a difficult subject an absolute pleasure. Even more importantly, you have shown me the correct approach to the Buddhadhamma. This Dhamma is not just another course in education or training; we don't take it up and master it, we take refuge in it. Our role is to listen and learn, the rest is a matter for conditions beyond our control. One of my many favourite quotes on this point is in a recent post from Nina; Even when satippatthana is not always expressly mentioned, it is always implied, because it is the specific teaching of the Buddha. His teaching is unique, not to be compared to what other teachers before him had also taught. [end quote] Returning to the subject of lurking, it was Sukin who inspired me to post this late introductory message when she wrote; Dear Cybele, Not sure if I can say that I have 'arrived' at your wavelength of communication. But reading you certainly has made me aware of my tendency to misconstrue. By accumulations I am quite slow to understanding others, but now I know in part, why. And it has been quite liberating. [end quote] Where you may be quite slow, Sukin, I am very slow - I have been all my life and it makes me reluctant to join in conversations. So many times I have read a reply to a dsg post and thought, "Oh, is that what s/he meant! Am I glad no one will see the reply I had in mind!" Thank you for the inspiration to come out, if only briefly. Kind regards to all, Ken 6388 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 7:52am Subject: Samatha-Vipassana Dear group On this thread on meditation I find interesting to consider this short text. >source: Access to Insight >http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an02-029.html > >Anguttara Nikaya II.29 > >Vijja-bhagiya Sutta > >A Share in Clear Knowing >Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. >For free distribution only. >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >"These two qualities have a share in clear knowing. Which two? >Tranquillity (samatha) & insight (vipassana). > >"When tranquillity is developed, what purpose does it serve? The >mind is developed. And when the mind is developed, what >purpose does it serve? Passion is abandoned. > >"When insight is developed, what purpose does it serve? >Discernment is developed. And when discernment is developed, >what purpose does it serve? Ignorance is abandoned." > 6389 From: m. nease Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 8:22am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello dsg Congratulations on finding and appreciating these fine folks, Ken--I feel just the same way. If you're as slow you say you are, we may be in direct competition for 'Slowest'--I'll try to be a good sport. I'm also a great fan of Sukin's posts--who, by the way, is a He (this was pointed out to me after one of MY first posts...) mike --- Ken Howard wrote: > Hello DhammaStudyGroup > > My name is Ken Howard, I am a fifty-year-old > Australian who has been > lurking on this excellent list for the past seven or > eight months. > In that time, I have learned more than in all of my > previous twenty- > six years as a Dhamma student. > > I am posting this message, partly to say thank you > for your invaluable > guidance and partly to explain my lurking behaviour. > > > What a big mistake it was to think (for twenty-six > years), that a > knowledge of the Abhidhamma was not important - let > alone vitally > important. You (dsg) put me straight on that and, > along with your > related web sites, you are making the study of a > difficult subject an > absolute pleasure. > > Even more importantly, you have shown me the correct > approach to the > Buddhadhamma. This Dhamma is not just another > course in education or > training; we don't take it up and master it, we take > refuge in > it. > Our role is to listen and learn, the rest is a > matter for conditions > beyond our control. > > One of my many favourite quotes on this point is in > a recent post from > Nina; > Even when satippatthana is not always expressly > mentioned, it is > always implied, because it is the specific teaching > of the Buddha. > His teaching is unique, not to be compared to what > other teachers > before him had also taught. [end quote] > > Returning to the subject of lurking, it was Sukin > who inspired me to > post this late introductory message when she wrote; > > Dear Cybele, Not sure if I can say that I have > 'arrived' at your > wavelength of communication. But reading you > certainly has made me > aware of my tendency to misconstrue. By > accumulations I am quite slow > to understanding others, but now I know in part, > why. And it has been > quite liberating. [end quote] > > Where you may be quite slow, Sukin, I am very slow > - I have been all > my life and it makes me reluctant to join in > conversations. So many > times I have read a reply to a dsg post and thought, > "Oh, is that > what s/he meant! Am I glad no one will see the reply > I had in > mind!" > > Thank you for the inspiration to come out, if only > briefly. > > Kind regards to all, > Ken > > 6390 From: ppp Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 1:09am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Speed of falling away (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Hi, Mike: I've read your last question carefully, and I can tell you that I am not the right person to answer your question. You should direct the question to Nina. She is able to answer your question from the viewpoint of Abidhamma. Although to study things from the Abhidhammic viewpoint differ, in nature, from the actual experiences; at least, it provides us with theoretical/ intellectual grasp of the issue in hand. (I've forgot so many things about Abhidhmma and have to stduy it again.) tadao 6391 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 9:32am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Narada Thera - U Narada dear Rob >>Thanks for the link Mike. I have both volumes - and very good >they are too (trans. by Narada thera of burma). > I guess you have read Nina's Conditions available as a free >download from www.zolag.co.uk (150 page introduction to the >Patthana) Sweetheart, I think you got confused here - Ven. Narada Thera is from Sri Lanka and a great scholar who wrote 'Buddha and his teachings'. The burmese you are referring is U Narada, the one who made the translation of the Patthana. Please don't disappoint me, you must be without any flaw! You are aging Rob...better you start with ginseng! ;-) Love Cybele 6392 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 9:45am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Narada Thera - U Narada Thera is a title that any monk with over 10 rains can be referred by. U is a prefix that even some respected layBurmese are given. --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > dear Rob > > >>Thanks for the link Mike. I have both volumes - and very > good > >they are too (trans. by Narada thera of burma). > > I guess you have read Nina's Conditions available as a free > >download from www.zolag.co.uk (150 page introduction to the > >Patthana) > > Sweetheart, I think you got confused here - Ven. Narada Thera > is from Sri > Lanka and a great scholar who wrote 'Buddha and his > teachings'. > The burmese you are referring is U Narada, the one who made > the translation > of the Patthana. > Please don't disappoint me, you must be without any flaw! > You are aging Rob...better you start with ginseng! ;-) > > Love > > Cybele > 6393 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 9:54am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello dsg Your laudable introduction only leaves me to say welcome and hope to hear more from you Ken. kind regards robert --- Ken Howard wrote: > Hello DhammaStudyGroup > > My name is Ken Howard, I am a fifty-year-old Australian who > has been > lurking on this excellent list for the past seven or eight > months. > In that time, I have learned more than in all of my previous > twenty- > six years as a Dhamma student. > 6394 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 9:54am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Kom >Dear Cybele, > >Before we discuss this sutta more (Maha-Satipatthana: >http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn22.html), let me ask you a >few sets of questions: > >Set 1: Robert, our favorite dhamma friend >========================== >1) Does his recent answer about how "he" practices certify that his >practice is formal? He did go to some quiet place, he did contemplate the >objects of tranquil meditations, he did walk around (not sure how slowly >he walked!), but he did *not* mention that he sat cross-legged and >observed the breath. Suppose my previous post to Rob and you answer the question. But no I suppose he doesn't practice what is called an orthodox practice of meditation. Lord Buddha, listen to me, I will become dogmatic and fundamentalist going on like this.....;-) > >Set 2: Adjuncts of formal practice that is not part of Satipatthana sutta >============================================ >2) As I mentioned my experience in the retreats, they had these >components: > >a) Sitting cross-legged, and "bind" one's attention to the breathing. At >this point, although other objects may arise, one "acknowledges" it and >then lets it go, and goes back to paying attention to breathing. >b) Walking slowly and paying attention to certain things. >c) Doing some thing else, but paying attention to certain things. >d) No talking during such retreat. Your description is altogether vague dear Kom but I love you the same because you are 'listening to me' and not dismissing right away even if you are not keen on meditation. This is an enquiring mind and not being dogmatic. I appreciate very much. Paying attention to certain things as you describe is not very 'informative' for me. The instructions are very much precise. >a) and c) appear to be in the sutta. Indeed. b) is in the sutta but there is nowhere that says that one has to walk *slowly*. Walking slowly is merely a reccomendation in order to slow down mental proliferation and fostering a keen, attentive observation of the movements that you could perhaps miss if walking at a normal pace. When your mind is trained you can meditate while walking normally. Just a strategy to help. There is nothing related to d). The Noble Silence is there to avoid the increasing of conceptual thought. All the idea Kom is exactly slow down and observe in bare attention without interferring and not elaborating. If you talk, you cannot avoid elaborating and conceptual thought is stimulated. The goal is simply allow your mental contents to emerge and they cannot emerge if you keep talking because you are not aware, you are producing multiplicity, papanca, mental proliferation. It's just an obvious choice. Personally being as you can imagine a very talkative person, discovering the silence was almost overwhelming intense for me; I enjoyed too much after an initial perplexity and aversion. I was actually 'listening' to my mental and bodily processes, I was paying real attention, I was penetrating that reality, exploring a new, fascinating territory. And breaking down all stereotypes; I am so vital and dynamic but I could handle silence and passivity, I could surrender and not cling to my mental habits and emotional patterns. It was a wonderful experience my first Vipassana retreat. > >In the above 4 behaviors, what do you take as the procedures/steps >(besides sitting cross-legged and observing the breath) that are necessary >to be certified a formal practice? I am not distributing certificates Kom, you have to ask Rob, he is the stream enterer not me. :-) Anyway also this you can get in my sharing of the practice in the previous mail. I use the four foundations of mindfulness as described in the sutta: Body Sensations/feelings Mind Mental contents Love Cybele > >--- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > > > > > I am not alluding to any retreat but to formal ordinary practice as >a > >OK. Formal practice doesn't mean going to a retreat. > > > >means of mental training to sharpen the mind and weaken defilements. > > > >The fact that we apply the very same instructions in daily >awareness it > > >seems to me just logical. > > > > The practice must be a continuum. > > > > But this is not a justification to neglect the formal practice > > >whatsoever. > >OK. We need to apply formal practice in our daily life. > > > The taught behaviour that you allude to is 'taught' by the Buddha >himself > > not any re-elaborated technique inspired on Buddhist philosophy. > >By Buddhist philosophy, do you mean the teachings related to the >Abhidhamma, or are you just strictly referring to how people in this group >go about discussing the phenomena? Do you consider the Abhidhamma >to be the teachings of the Buddha? > > > "This is the sole way, monks, for the purification of beings, for the > > overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, for the destroying of pain and >grief, > > for reaching the right path, for the realization of Nibbana, namely the >Four > > Foundations of Mindfulness." > >OK. The Buddha says the 4 foundations of mindfulness (satipatthana) is >the only path. > > > "The contemplation of the Body > > > > Mindfulness of Breathing > > And how , monks does a monk dwell practising body-contemplation on >the body? > > Herein, monks, a monk having gone to the forest, to the foot of a tree, >or > > to an empty place, sits down cross-legged, keeps his body erect and his > > mindfulness alert. > > Just mindful he breathes in and mindful he breathes out....." > > > > Well, this is just the beginning of the instructions but as you can >notice > > the posture as the mental attitude is all about 'meditation' as a > > fundamental tool to foster awareness and get insights into the reality >of > > body, feelings, mind, mental contents. > >Do you consider the sutta to be step-by-step instructions or do you >consider it to be general guidance, i.e., that all the steps in the sutta >need >to be done for the practice to be considered formal? Do you consider >some of the steps to be pre-requisite to others, i.e, since step (a) is >mentioned before step (b), and therefore, (a) has to be done before (b). > > > > > I will continue in another mail, this is only to clarify the source of >the > > so called instructions about meditation as a mean to develop insight > > contained in the Satipathana Sutta. > > > >I will be awaiting your further explanation of what you consider formal, >and additional explanations of the Maha-Satipatthana sutta. > >As you may have noticed, as soon as you start sprinkling some of the >intellectualization into this interaction, your intellectualizing male >friends >start to follow you like herds ;-). By my estimate, by the time you are >finished explaining this sutta, you will be the most popular hot-blooded >female in the group. I hope you don't mind this so much... > >kom > > 6395 From: ppp Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 2:53am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Narada Thera - U Narada Rob: Just for your inforamtion, Ven. Naarada Thera had been an abbot of Vajira Aaraama in Columbo/Sri Lanka for a long time. A small stature (i.e. height) but had a very pretty/Boddhisatva like face. (I stayed at the temple for 10 months when he was still alive.) tadao 6396 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 10:05am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Narada Thera - U Narada Dear Rob > Thera is a title that any monk with over 10 rains can be >referred by. U is a prefix that even some respected layBurmese >are given. This I know Rob I have been doing the apparently 'useless' formal meditation in both Sri Lanka and Burma but the monk you are referring who is : Narada Thera from Sri Lanka or U Narada from Burma who translated the Patthana? You wrote: I have both volumes - and very good > > >they are too (trans. by Narada thera of burma). This I pointed out because if you use Thera for U Narada can be confusing being the Narada Thera from Sri Lanka quite notorious. Then you are not aging and I am nit-picking, do you prefer like this? I apologyse if I gave the impression of being pedantic, it was not my intention. Cybele >--- cybele chiodi wrote: > > > > dear Rob > > > > >>Thanks for the link Mike. I have both volumes - and very > > good > > >they are too (trans. by Narada thera of burma). > > > I guess you have read Nina's Conditions available as a free > > >download from www.zolag.co.uk (150 page introduction to the > > >Patthana) > > > > Sweetheart, I think you got confused here - Ven. Narada Thera > > is from Sri > > Lanka and a great scholar who wrote 'Buddha and his > > teachings'. > > The burmese you are referring is U Narada, the one who made > > the translation > > of the Patthana. > > Please don't disappoint me, you must be without any flaw! > > You are aging Rob...better you start with ginseng! ;-) > > > > Love > > > > Cybele > > > 6397 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 10:10am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Narada Thera - U Narada Dear Tadao > >Rob: >Just for your inforamtion, Ven. Naarada Thera had been an >abbot of Vajira Aaraama in Columbo/Sri Lanka for a long time. >A small stature (i.e. height) but had a very pretty/Boddhisatva like >face. (I stayed at the temple for 10 months when he was still alive.) >tadao > Now I am confused, the Narada Thera that I am referring and is well know is the Sri Lanka one. But Narada Thera and U Narada are the same person with different titles or indeed two different persons? Cybele 6398 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 10:13am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Narada Thera - U Narada Ahh. The monk who did the Patthana trans. is U Narada of Burma (not Narada thera- my alzheimers is really kicking in these days). Why was the sri lankan Narada notorious? robert --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > Dear Rob > > > > Thera is a title that any monk with over 10 rains can be > >referred by. U is a prefix that even some respected > layBurmese > >are given. > > This I know Rob I have been doing the apparently 'useless' > formal meditation > in both Sri Lanka and Burma but the monk you are referring who > is : Narada > Thera from Sri Lanka or U Narada from Burma who translated the > Patthana? > > You wrote: > I have both volumes - and very good > > > >they are too (trans. by Narada thera of burma). > > This I pointed out because if you use Thera for U Narada can > be confusing > being the Narada Thera from Sri Lanka quite notorious. > > Then you are not aging and I am nit-picking, do you prefer > like this? > I apologyse if I gave the impression of being pedantic, it was > not my > intention. > > Cybele > > 6399 From: Howard Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 6:33am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Hi, Robert - In a message dated 7/16/01 11:21:37 AM Eastern Daylight Time, <> writes: > On this issue to when we talk about moments we should rememeber > the various conditions such as anataraya - paccaya (proximity > condition)and other conditions. The present moment is > conditioned by the preceeding moment by this condition (not to > mention other conditions) . > It is not that when we talk about moments arising and passing > away that they are totally discrete little packages (it can > sound that way but this is not what is meant in the Abhidhamma). > This is thoroughly explained in the Patthana, the last book of > the Abhidhamma. > best wishes > ============================ Yes, I understand that preceding cittas condition the current citta in various ways, and the various cetasikas within a given citta bear relations to each other. But there still is exactly one citta at any time, with "sharp boundaries" so-to-speak; that is, a citta wouldn'y be modeled by, say, a fuzzy interval, would it? (Or would it?) 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)