9000 From: Sarah Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 5:18am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Dear Rob Ep, I apprecdiated this post of yours, Rob, and the questions and comments raised. --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Sarah, > Thanks for your help. I found it very clear. I do have a couple of > questions: > > Is there any reason given why only one citta can arise at a time? Why must > they > be sequential? If there is no 'mind' in which they are to occur, why or how > are > they coordinated in a tight sequential string? I think I can only say to the first 2 questions that this is how it is...and our task is to understand the ‘descriptive’ rather than to reason why.....The only other answer I may add is that they must be exactly this way and cannot be any other way because of the complex way conditions (paccaya) cause them to be like this. So the citta now arises sequentially because of anantara paccaya which means it is conditioned by the preceeding citta to arise sequentially and so many, many other conditions to make it be this citta and no other citta arising. So imagine a puppet on thousands of strings, each coordinated and having effect. The way the puppet moves sequentially is a result of these complex moves and adjustments (read conditions). Or to keep a lingering Indian thread alive, why does an Indian curry on any day taste just the way it does? Isn’t it because of the particular ingredients, the quantities of those ingredients on that day, the order and timing they are added and of course the nature of the tasting, the taste buds, the temperature, the previous experiences, the place and time of tasting and so on and so on. Only the Buddha can really see and understand all the conditions for a reality to arise at any time. However, by reading and considering a little more about conditions (I’m resisting from reminding you of more homework), it helps to see there is no mind, form or body as we usually understand. > If sati is an 'accompaniment' of a citta when it does occur, rather than a > citta > itself, what is it? Where or how does sati arise? Does it 'piggyback' on > its > associated citta(s)? Does it also last for specific number of cittas as a > rupa > does? How would you define sati? I always thought of mindfulness as being > 'an > awareness of being aware'. In other words, for those moments, one is aware > that > there is a process of consciousness taking place, rather than merely > participating > in the consciousness without realizing it. Is this a definition you would > accord > with? Excellent questions and considerations, Rob, but I’m not sure my answer will do them justice Yes, sati (awareness) is a mental factor which sometimes accompanies citta (consciousness). It accompanies all wholesome (kusala) cittas and is aware of the object for those moments only. It can be aware of any reality, but is not necessarily (read very seldom if at all) at the level of satipatthana which is aware of a reality as not self. So for example, if there is generosity or kindness without ever having heard the Buddha’s teachings, at the moments these mental states arise with the wholesome cittas, there is sati which is mindful of what is skilful and prevents that which is unskilful, but not necessarily accompanied by wisdom. Mindfulness “does not allow the floating away of moral states” (Atth.) Awareness can be aware of any reality, including awareness (sati). As we’ve discussed recently, strictly speaking, it is not aware of itself but of the characteristic of sati which has just fallen away. Sati is not aware of a process, but just of one reality at these times. It’s thinking which thinks about a process of consciousness. In ‘Cetasikas’, Nina quotes from the Atthasalini: ‘...Mindulness 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 door-keper from guarding the door of the senses.’ Like all other cetasikas (mental factors), sati arises momentarily by conditions, performs its task and falls away. It’s not self, doesn’t last and is inherently unsatisfactory and not worthy of being clung to. However, when it is highly developed with panna, it is an indriya (controlling faculty) and ‘a “leader” of the citta and accompanying cetasikas in its function of heedfulness, of non-forgetfulness of what is wholesome.’ It is also one of the 8-fold factors and an enlightenment factor. > Would it be fair to say that the process that sati 'awakens' to in insight > moments > and eventually in Nibbana, is an awareness that all that seems to be a > relation > with real objects is really a relation of mind with objects of mind? I’m a little lost here. I think it’s most useful to consider what are the realities being experienced at the present moment. By beginning to be aware (sati being aware) of a nama or rupa (mental or physical phenomena) now, such as seeing or visible object, feeling or hardness and so on, this is the way sati develops. Being aware of these different realities, and understanding the difference between them, is the only way to develop detachment from the idea of a self or a lasting consciousness. Sati is very precise and has a very specific function and characteristic. > Gee, I really have no hesitation to give you a hard time while your dear > friends > and associates are away. If I'm being overly inquisitive, just let me know. > I > know you have a schedule beyond our little 'chats'! I hope to hear more of these questions. You’re not giving me a hard time at all and our little ‘chats’ are a joy, even if I sometimes misunderstand your point, can’t always provide the answers or am rather slow;-). I’m particularly interested in anything further you have to say on this thread which is so directly related to the present moment and realities to be known now. Sarah 9001 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 5:27am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 4 Hi Sarah > I’ll just add a couple of comments as I read this passage before adding > another > quote. > > The last phrase clearly applies to the unconditioned nature of nibbana. > It is > clear (to me) that nibbana is unconditioned, while being experienced by > the > conditioned. > > All the references to ‘penetration’, ‘hard to see’, ‘abstruse’, ‘logic’, > ‘wise’, ‘knowledge’,refer to the cittas and cetasikas (and in particular > to > panna) which have to be developed to ‘penetrate’ and ‘realise’ the > unconditioned ‘element’. Without this ‘ultra-profound’ development, > nibbana is > not experienced. > > Nibbana has its ‘own nature’ does not suggest any self, just as seeing, > hearing > and other realities have their ‘own nature’ which is not self too. K: Sarah, I appreciate your kind patient in imparting true understanding of the Nibbana concepts. I like to point out that I agreed with you that Nibbana is anatta. on the other hand what I trying to point out is that isn't this nature even though anatta also a "nature" on its own right. Isn't it similiar to Mahayana, concept of Buddha Nature or Unborn. I hope I am being clear abt what I think. Kind regards Ken O 9002 From: Sarah Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 5:35am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello...[Erik] Erik, > > on Sunday I will be > > officially married > ============================= > Warmest congratulations, Erik!! May you have lifetimes of happiness together. > May I also wish send my bery best wishes to you and Aert. I hope you both have a very memorable and happy day on Sunday with plenty of wise reflection and mindfulness. I'm sure we'll all be thinking of you then. Who knows, Aert may be able and willing to join us on the list as well in time too;-)) Your wedding day almost falls on our anniversary (20th) a few days later, but let me assure you that we're still learning;-) With metta and best wishes, Sarah 9003 From: Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 5:47am Subject: Re: Hello...[Erik and Herman] Yes, congratulations and best wishes, Erik. Also Herman was married last month and I missed sending my good wishes. Congratulations, Herman. I'm sure your little "Brady bunch" is fortunate in having you as the father and husband. robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Erik, > > > > on Sunday I will be > > > officially married > > ============================= > > Warmest congratulations, Erik!! May you have lifetimes of happiness together. > > > > May I also wish send my bery best wishes to you and Aert. I hope you both have > a very memorable and happy day on Sunday with plenty of wise reflection and > mindfulness. I'm sure we'll all be thinking of you then. Who knows, Aert may be > able and willing to join us on the list as well in time too;-)) > > Your wedding day almost falls on our anniversary (20th) a few days later, but > let me assure you that we're still learning;-) > > With metta and best wishes, > > Sarah > 9004 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 6:01am Subject: Re: Hello...[Erik] > Fortunately you're in luck, Dan, because on Sunday I will be > officially married Sunday?! Wow! That was quick. I do wish you all the best, Erik. 9005 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 6:06am Subject: Re: Hello Welcome, Jesse! > Hello, > I just joined this list on the recommendation of a friend on IRC. I got > into Buddhism just a short while ago, and I am trying to read the various > suttas as I find them. I may not be very knowledgeable or useful in the > various discussions, so I will just watch for the time being. Thanks. > > Jesse Dhillon. > > "Subject to decay are all component things; strive earnestly to work out > your own salvation." 9006 From: Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 1:12am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi, Kenneth - In a message dated 10/30/01 8:12:27 AM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn@y... writes: > > Hi Howard > > Thanks for you point of view. > > > > > > > > > >K: Nibbana can never be experienced by conditioned cittas because > > > > Nibbana is unconditional, if it is not then why classified it as > > > unconditionanal the first place. > > > > > > > > S: There’s been a lot of discussion on this issue (see ‘useful > > posts’ > > > > under nibbana perhaps...) Many people here find it very difficult to > > > accept that the unconditioned (Nibbana) is experienced by the > > conditioned > > > (lokuttara cittas), but that’s how it is in the Pali canon as > > indicated in > > > my previous quote. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > Howard: > > Just a request for clarification: Found in which pitakas? And if > > it is found in the suttas, is it clear there that nibbana is intended > to be a positively existing separate dhamma being observed by cittas, or > is "observing nibbana" more along the lines of the mind getting a glimpse > > of what it is like to have ignorance dispelled, a glimpse of the way > things really are when seen truly? > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > k: Yes Howard we can see a glimpse of it is base on the definition of > Nibbana in Mahayana terms. > > > > > > > > > k: It is the same thing when I say cittas don't die, you find it > > difficult > > > to believe me. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > Howard: > > Ken, what do you mean by "believe me"? Are you claiming to have a > > direct line to "The Truth"? The Buddha said quite clearly that all > conditions cease. Nothing lasts. Impermanence. Are you saying that you > have directly seen that to be false? > > As far as "believing" you is concerned, the Buddha said that even > > *he* should not be taken purely on faith. Now, all my direct experience > has confirmed to me the Buddha's teaching on impermanence. With all due > > respect, on what basis do you suggest we "believe" you? > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > k: Howard you have misread me. I disagree with you that Buddha said that > all conditions cease means all things are destroyed. I have said a few > times that I disgree with you on the defintion of ceassation. Would you > like to quote me the Pali Cannon Suttas where Buddha said all cittas are > destroyed completely or annihilated. > ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: How's the following? *********************************************** Samyutta Nikaya XXXVI.9 Anicca Sutta Impermanent Translated from the Pali by Nyanaponika Thera. For free distribution only. From Contemplation of Feeling: The Discourse-grouping on the Feelings (WH 303), translated from the Pali by Nyanaponika Thera (Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society, 1983). Copyright ©1983 Buddhist Publication Society. Used with permission. "The three kinds of feelings, O monks, are impermanent, compounded, dependently arisen, liable to destruction, to evanescence, to fading away, to cessation -- namely, pleasant feeling, painful feeling and neutral feeling." **************************************** I find "... liable to DESTRUCTION, to evanescence, to fading away, to CESSATION ..." [emphases mine] to be fairly clear. On the other hand, if all that you mean by impermanence not meaning destruction is that there are no truly independent, self-existing "things" to begin with, and hence none to be destroyed, I would agree with you. But that is not how you have expressed it. If you mean something else, then I'm afraid that I just don'tunderstand you. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > >K: Assuming Nibbana can be experienced by conditioned if we used > > the > > > > basis > that Nibbana has the same nature of anatta as conditioned > > > cittas. But the > problem as they are anatta, whatever citta > > experienced > > > will be illusory. Because this "illusory experience" is due to the > > > speed of cittas which a self thought there is self in anatta. Nibbana > > > cannot be substantiated on this basis because in Nibbana we see > > reality, > > > which mean anatta is fully understand, hence there is no "illusory > > > experience". > > > > > > > > S: I agree there is no ilusory experience. The cittas and nibbana > > are > > > > anatta. Anatta doesn’t mean illusory. Sorry I’m having trouble > > following > > > you here. Rob Ep or Howard may be able to follow your thinking better > > > here. > > > > > > > > > k: The problem is then we thought kusala cittas is the one > > leading to > > > > > Nibbana which is not correct. Because kusala cittas are dependent > > on > > > > > akusala cittas to be in existence. If there is no akuasla citta, > > we > > > > would not know what is kuasala cittas in the first place. Cittas > > cannot > > > > > eradicate another cittas because they have the same > > charateristics. > > > > Citta is categories into four jati but to me they are not mutually > > > > exclusive. Furthermore if we look at sati, it is never abt getting > > > rid, it is abt knowing its coming and going. No eradication because > > > eradication or getting rid is still attached to a subtle self concept > > for > > > an "action" to be enforced whereas coming and going we let things as > > it > > > is, > > > > attachment to a self concept is also let go. That is why I keep > > > insisting that Nibbana to me is not eradication of defilements it is > > the > > > letting go of defilements and in the next moment one is in Nibbana. > > One > > > let go of conditions to reach unconditional reality. > > > > > > > S: Sorry, can you give the the text or the commentary reference you > > are > > > > referring to here as I’m not clear where these ideas come from. > > May I > > > > just stress that the characteristic of sati is to be aware of a > > reality > > > for a moment and then gone. There is no ‘one’ to let go of > > conditions or > > > defilements or anything else. If it is not the development of kusala > > > cittas (and in particular, the development of wisdom) that leads to > > > nibbana, then I wonder why the Buddha stresses this development so > > much? > > > > > > k: It is we classify those sati, metta, other wholesome practises as > > > kusala cittas and during such kusala cittas there is no akusala > > cittas. > > > Buddha urge us to do kusala cittas but he did not classify that if we > > have > > > kusala cittas there is no akusala present in this kusala itself. > > Because > > > kusala does not equate akusala. It is like using another "self" to > > > replace a "self". Furthermore as I have said earlier, kusala and > > akusala > > > both depend on each other to be in existence, hence it is not > > permanent. > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > I won't argue about things not being permanent! ;-)) But, as far > > as > > kusala and akusala being mutually dependent, I believe you are mixing > > two > > different senses of 'dependent' here. For sure, the *concepts* of > > 'kusala' > > and 'akusala' are mutually dependent. But that does not, in and of > > itself, > > imply that any kusala dhamma arises in dependence on an akusala one or > > vice-versa. Dependent arising of specific experienced dhammas differs > > from > > the logico-semantic interdependence of concepts. > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > > k: I know what you mean, I like to ask you this questions do cittas cares > whether they are kusala or akusala. Do they share the same function as > cognize. It is we when we start to differentiate that this is kusala or > that is akusala then we are in the begining of attaching to ideas again or > in short discrimination. Dan says Buddhist practise is paradoxical and I > agree with him. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: The terms 'kusala' and 'akusala' are, of course, conventional terms. Mind states are certainly just what they are. However, some are conducive to such things as calm, insight, lovingkindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity, and others are not. It is useful to distinguish those which are from those which are not. We call the first group 'kusala'. ------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > To do kusala like metta is conventional so that the mind is more > > peaceful > > > but these do not help us to attain arahant bc all religion urges > > goodness > > > but they do not attain arahant bc they are one sided in their > > practise. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Howard: > > Certainly sila is not sufficient for awakening, but it is a > > necessary > > part of the Buddha's path, a part which you correctly point out is > > common to > > all religions. > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > In his method of sati, there is no right or wrong just pure attention > > to > > > what arise. If we have pure attention what arise, it is very > > difficult to > > > do bad or to be attached. Sorry my understanding does not base on > > > commentaries, it is base on practise that I feel this is the point and > > > plus Mahayana doctrinal influences and relooking at sati sutras. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > When one's mind is not already reasonably free of the turmoil of > > akusala thought and emotion - and I do assume that your mind *is* free > > of > > such, at least to the same extent as the rest of us - there is rarely a > > solid > > enough foundation for the development of further calm and insight. > > Moreover, > > when one is tied to wrong view and filled with hate or craving, should > > one > > somehow be able to make progress in meditation, one is likely to > > misinterpret > > what one "sees" and to misuse the fruits of the practice. > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > k: Thanks for your advice and concern. To me what I just trying to say > what I think. It was not meant to talk down to pple or force my idea on > other pple. If I sound like that, I sincerely apologise to everyone here. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: I'm not saying anything along such lines, Kenneth. I'm simply disagreeing with you. Without a solid foundation of sila, the establishment of which is an essential part of the Buddha's prescription for curing dukkha, the mind is in too much turmoil for the other aspects of the training to be effective. At least a modicum of sila needs to be in place. ------------------------------------------------------------------ > But to me if you think I am wrong, talk to me. Clear my doubts. Yes I > admit I am a stubborn person hence that is why I throw away all the > fixations ideas of Buddhism away once in a while. I never said that > understanding the three posions is not impt. It is there we know it, but > as I say in sati, when we are mindful, it is difficult to do things that > are attached to these three poisons. My argument is base on sati > principle and not on anything else. We must know when we talk abt kusala > or akusala is like saying this is good and this is bad. This principle of > practise is to me not agreeable to what I think Buddha is trying to say. > He is I think trying to point a practise that is neither attached to both > ends of discrimination. Chan Master Hui Neng say that "our difference > between us and Buddha is because we are full of right and wrong, and good > and bad" ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Right mindfulness is one factor out of eight in the noble eightfold path. To be sure, it assumes a royal position, a leadership position among the factors, but it is not the whole of the practice. ---------------------------------------------------- > > k: Once again I sincerely apologise if I sound forceful in my views which > sincerely I feel very unmindful of me and very inconsiderate of me. -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: There's nothing at all akusala ;-)) in being forceful, and I see no reason whatsoever for you to see yourself as being unmindful or inconsiderate. I am simply expressing disagreement with you on a few points, and also expressing that it is not a matter of "believing" or "disbelieving", but simply a matter of agreeing with you or disagreeing with you on certain points - and maybe not even that, but, rather a matter of clarification of positions. ----------------------------------------------------- > > Kind regards > Ken O > > =========================== 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) 9007 From: m. nease Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 10:05am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Re; Horses [Erik] Hi RobEp, I think you're right. And I also think that the reason some of us have become such hammerheads on the subject of satipatthaana is that all that other kusala, no matter how kusala, just leads to more sa.msaara--satipatthaana does not. That's how I understand it, anyway... mike --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- rikpa21@y... wrote: > > ...I always come back > > to this point here, it seems. While we can talk > about anatta until > > the cows come home, even particle physicists know > that nothing has > > any intrinsic nature. And yet what does that do > for them in terms of > > eradicating the source of suffering? Seriously? > There is much more to > > the game than just the study of Right View, which, > as forerunner, may > > be key, yet it still plays a holistic role with > all the other path- > > factors like Right Speech, Right Resolve, Right > Effort, etc., and > > these operate at both the conventional and > supramundane levels. > > Erik, > I don't know if this applies to what you are saying, > but I would say there's a big > difference between understanding something as a > concept and experiencing it. But > they are related. > > I spent some time trying to directly contemplate > anicca and anatta the other week > and had a moment when I suddenly realized that what > I considered 'Robert' was just > a temporary collection of experiences. I had > understood this concept for a long > time, but the realization at that moment was that it > was not just right but > *actual*. It was quite a shock. Instead of having > the reaction I thought I would > have had, that I would be depressed at the sense of > temporariness and mortality > that this revealed, it was exciting and liberating. > So this to me was a direct > experience of anicca. Now I can't say what ultimate > effect it had. But when I > think back I now have this memory of a direct > experience of 'anicca' as it > pertains to my 'self' [just meaning the familiar > body, thoughts, etc. that I > associate with 'Robert']. These moments of direct > insight, whether they are > 'large' or 'small' have a very different flavour > from studying and understanding a > concept. And in that sense they seem to me to be > akin to the real workings of the > path. > > I've also sometimes gone for years looking at > concepts and had *no* insights of > that sudden and direct kind, so I can't say that > there is any direct relation. > But I'm sure there is an indirect and cumulative > relation between Right View and > the development of Insight. > > What do you think? > > Best, > Robert Ep. 9008 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 0:30pm Subject: Re: Re; Horses [Erik] Hi Rob E., > I've also sometimes gone for years looking at concepts and had *no* insights of > that sudden and direct kind, so I can't say that there is any direct relation. > But I'm sure there is an indirect and cumulative relation between Right View and > the development of Insight. > > What do you think? Bingo. 9009 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 5:10pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi Howard, > Howard: > How's the following? > *********************************************** > Samyutta Nikaya XXXVI.9 > > Anicca Sutta > > Impermanent > > Translated from the Pali by Nyanaponika Thera. > For free distribution only. > From HREF="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel303.html">Contemplation > of Feeling: The Discourse-grouping on the Feelings (WH > 303), translated from the Pali by Nyanaponika Thera (Kandy: Buddhist > > Publication Society, 1983). Copyright ©1983 Buddhist Publication > Society. > Used with permission. "The three kinds of feelings, O monks, are > impermanent, > compounded, dependently arisen, liable to destruction, to evanescence, > to > fading away, to cessation -- namely, pleasant feeling, painful feeling > and > neutral feeling." > **************************************** > I find "... liable to DESTRUCTION, to evanescence, to fading > away, to > CESSATION ..." [emphases mine] to be fairly clear. On the other hand, if > all > that you mean by impermanence not meaning destruction is that there are > no > truly independent, self-existing "things" to begin with, and hence none > to be > destroyed, I would agree with you. But that is not how you have > expressed it. > If you mean something else, then I'm afraid that I just don'tunderstand > you. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ k: Yes that is what I meant all dhammas are empty by nature, so what is there to be destroyed. All dhammas are of one nature, what is there to destroyed. All are unborn, what is there to be destroyed since it was not born in the first place. Feelings can never be destroyed because it comes from nowhere and it goes to nowhere, how do we destroyed something that has no fixations. It is only when our "self" is involved, we though it has a fixations. Even when we talk abt feelings (cetasika), where does it go after it cease or where does it come out from? > > > > k: I know what you mean, I like to ask you this questions do cittas > cares > > whether they are kusala or akusala. Do they share the same function > as > > cognize. It is we when we start to differentiate that this is kusala > or > > that is akusala then we are in the begining of attaching to ideas > again or > > in short discrimination. Dan says Buddhist practise is paradoxical > and I > > agree with him. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > The terms 'kusala' and 'akusala' are, of course, conventional > terms. > Mind states are certainly just what they are. However, some are > conducive to > such things as calm, insight, lovingkindness, compassion, sympathetic > joy, > and equanimity, and others are not. It is useful to distinguish those > which > are from those which are not. We call the first group 'kusala'. > ------------------------------------------------------- k: Yes if we are talking conventional, they are impt bc they are fruits for peaceful mind. > > > > > > > > > To do kusala like metta is conventional so that the mind is more > > > peaceful > > > > but these do not help us to attain arahant bc all religion urges > > > goodness > > > > but they do not attain arahant bc they are one sided in their > > > practise. > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Howard: > > > Certainly sila is not sufficient for awakening, but it is a > > > necessary > > > part of the Buddha's path, a part which you correctly point out is > > > common to > > > all religions. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- k: Isn't calm, insight, lovingkindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, also common to a lot of religion? > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > k: Thanks for your advice and concern. To me what I just trying to > say > > what I think. It was not meant to talk down to pple or force my idea > on > > other pple. If I sound like that, I sincerely apologise to everyone > here. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > I'm not saying anything along such lines, Kenneth. I'm simply > disagreeing with you. Without a solid foundation of sila, the > establishment > of which is an essential part of the Buddha's prescription for curing > dukkha, > the mind is in too much turmoil for the other aspects of the training to > be > effective. At least a modicum of sila needs to be in place. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > But to me if you think I am wrong, talk to me. Clear my doubts. Yes I > > admit I am a stubborn person hence that is why I throw away all the > > fixations ideas of Buddhism away once in a while. I never said that > > understanding the three posions is not impt. It is there we know it, > but > > as I say in sati, when we are mindful, it is difficult to do things > that > > are attached to these three poisons. My argument is base on sati > > principle and not on anything else. We must know when we talk abt > kusala > > or akusala is like saying this is good and this is bad. This > principle of > > practise is to me not agreeable to what I think Buddha is trying to > say. > > He is I think trying to point a practise that is neither attached to > both > > ends of discrimination. Chan Master Hui Neng say that "our difference > > between us and Buddha is because we are full of right and wrong, and > good > > and bad" > ----------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Right mindfulness is one factor out of eight in the noble > eightfold > path. To be sure, it assumes a royal position, a leadership position > among > the factors, but it is not the whole of the practice. > ---------------------------------------------------- k: Yes I am more incline to say that the leadership of the whole practise is right understanding. I am not saying that we should not followed the eight noble path, what I am trying to point out is when we are mindful, sila is not a major factor anymore, it all falls in line. Just like when you are meditating. Are you concern abt right or wrong, or just pure attention. Even when anger arise, it will not affect you. You become an observer of anger, or greed. Similarily, when we are mindful, we cannot do things that are of wrong actions, all sila automatically falls in line. When we have right concentration, it is even better (conventional sense). > > > > k: Once again I sincerely apologise if I sound forceful in my views > which > > sincerely I feel very unmindful of me and very inconsiderate of me. > > -------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > There's nothing at all akusala ;-)) in being forceful, and I see > no > reason whatsoever for you to see yourself as being unmindful or > inconsiderate. I am simply expressing disagreement with you on a few > points, > and also expressing that it is not a matter of "believing" or > "disbelieving", > but simply a matter of agreeing with you or disagreeing with you on > certain > points - and maybe not even that, but, rather a matter of clarification > of > positions. > ----------------------------------------------------- k: It could by my grasp of English is the problem bc I am brought up in another different culture. I would refrain from using this word. Kind regards Ken O 9010 From: Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 7:26pm Subject: Re: Hello...[Robert] Robert, Thank you for your help. I will ponder your response, and Dan will explain it to me several times. (Thanks also for the endorsement of my husband!) Lisa 9011 From: Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 2:40pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi, Kenneth - In a message dated 10/30/01 8:15:00 PM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn@y... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > > > Howard: > > How's the following? > > *********************************************** > > Samyutta Nikaya XXXVI.9 > > > > Anicca Sutta > > > > > Impermanent > > > > Translated from the Pali by Nyanaponika Thera. > > For free distribution only. > > From > > HREF="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel303.html"> > Contemplation > > of Feeling: The Discourse-grouping on the Feelings (WH > > 303), translated from the Pali by Nyanaponika Thera (Kandy: Buddhist > > > > Publication Society, 1983). Copyright ©1983 Buddhist Publication > > Society. > > Used with permission. "The three kinds of feelings, O monks, are > > impermanent, > > compounded, dependently arisen, liable to destruction, to evanescence, > > to > > fading away, to cessation -- namely, pleasant feeling, painful feeling > > and > > neutral feeling." > > **************************************** > > I find "... liable to DESTRUCTION, to evanescence, to fading > > away, to > > CESSATION ..." [emphases mine] to be fairly clear. On the other hand, if > > all > > that you mean by impermanence not meaning destruction is that there are > > no > > truly independent, self-existing "things" to begin with, and hence none > > to be > > destroyed, I would agree with you. But that is not how you have > > expressed it. > > If you mean something else, then I'm afraid that I just don'tunderstand > > you. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > k: Yes that is what I meant all dhammas are empty by nature, so what is > there to be destroyed. All dhammas are of one nature, what is there to > destroyed. All are unborn, what is there to be destroyed since it was not > born in the first place. Feelings can never be destroyed because it comes > from nowhere and it goes to nowhere, how do we destroyed something that > has no fixations. It is only when our "self" is involved, we though it > has a fixations. Even when we talk abt feelings (cetasika), where does it > go after it cease or where does it come out from? --------------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Ahhh! Understood. No disagreement then on this. -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > k: I know what you mean, I like to ask you this questions do cittas > > cares > > > whether they are kusala or akusala. Do they share the same function > > as > > > cognize. It is we when we start to differentiate that this is kusala > > or > > > that is akusala then we are in the begining of attaching to ideas > > again or > > > in short discrimination. Dan says Buddhist practise is paradoxical > > and I > > > agree with him. > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > The terms 'kusala' and 'akusala' are, of course, conventional > > terms. > > Mind states are certainly just what they are. However, some are > > conducive to > > such things as calm, insight, lovingkindness, compassion, sympathetic > > joy, > > and equanimity, and others are not. It is useful to distinguish those > > which > > are from those which are not. We call the first group 'kusala'. > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > k: Yes if we are talking conventional, they are impt bc they are fruits > for peaceful mind. > > > > > > > > > > > > > To do kusala like metta is conventional so that the mind is more > > > > peaceful > > > > > but these do not help us to attain arahant bc all religion urges > > > > goodness > > > > > but they do not attain arahant bc they are one sided in their > > > > practise. > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Howard: > > > > Certainly sila is not sufficient for awakening, but it is a > > > > necessary > > > > part of the Buddha's path, a part which you correctly point out is > > > > common to > > > > all religions. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > k: Isn't calm, insight, lovingkindness, compassion, sympathetic > joy, also common to a lot of religion? > ---------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: There are two exceptions, as I see it. Only through practicing the dhamma in its entirety, in my opinion, are the heights of insight and unshakable calm attainable. Through sila and concentration alone, which are the parts of the Buddha's path that appear elsewhere, only *limited* calm and insight are attainable. ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > k: Thanks for your advice and concern. To me what I just trying to > > say > > > what I think. It was not meant to talk down to pple or force my idea > > on > > > other pple. If I sound like that, I sincerely apologise to everyone > > here. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Howard: > > I'm not saying anything along such lines, Kenneth. I'm simply > > disagreeing with you. Without a solid foundation of sila, the > > establishment > > of which is an essential part of the Buddha's prescription for curing > > dukkha, > > the mind is in too much turmoil for the other aspects of the training to > > be > > effective. At least a modicum of sila needs to be in place. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > But to me if you think I am wrong, talk to me. Clear my doubts. Yes I > > > admit I am a stubborn person hence that is why I throw away all the > > > fixations ideas of Buddhism away once in a while. I never said that > > > understanding the three posions is not impt. It is there we know it, > > but > > > as I say in sati, when we are mindful, it is difficult to do things > > that > > > are attached to these three poisons. My argument is base on sati > > > principle and not on anything else. We must know when we talk abt > > kusala > > > or akusala is like saying this is good and this is bad. This > > principle of > > > practise is to me not agreeable to what I think Buddha is trying to > > say. > > > He is I think trying to point a practise that is neither attached to > > both > > > ends of discrimination. Chan Master Hui Neng say that "our difference > > > between us and Buddha is because we are full of right and wrong, and > > good > > > and bad" > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Right mindfulness is one factor out of eight in the noble > > eightfold > > path. To be sure, it assumes a royal position, a leadership position > > among > > the factors, but it is not the whole of the practice. > > ---------------------------------------------------- > > k: Yes I am more incline to say that the leadership of the whole practise > is right understanding. I am not saying that we should not followed the > eight noble path, what I am trying to point out is when we are mindful, > sila is not a major factor anymore, it all falls in line. Just like when > you are meditating. Are you concern abt right or wrong, or just pure > attention. Even when anger arise, it will not affect you. You become an > observer of anger, or greed. Similarily, when we are mindful, we cannot > do things that are of wrong actions, all sila automatically falls in line. > When we have right concentration, it is even better (conventional sense). > ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Conventional right understanding is very important throughout, and when augmented by the other seven path practices, led by mindfulness, there eventually arises supermundane right understanding (or wisdom), which, in turn, leads to liberation. ----------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > k: Once again I sincerely apologise if I sound forceful in my views > > which > > > sincerely I feel very unmindful of me and very inconsiderate of me. > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > There's nothing at all akusala ;-)) in being forceful, and I see > > no > > reason whatsoever for you to see yourself as being unmindful or > > inconsiderate. I am simply expressing disagreement with you on a few > > points, > > and also expressing that it is not a matter of "believing" or > > "disbelieving", > > but simply a matter of agreeing with you or disagreeing with you on > > certain > > points - and maybe not even that, but, rather a matter of clarification > > of > > positions. > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > k: It could by my grasp of English is the problem bc I am brought up in > another different culture. I would refrain from using this word. > > > > > Kind regards > Ken O > > ============================== 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) 9012 From: Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 7:43pm Subject: Re: Re; Horses [Erik] --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Dan Dalthorp" wrote: > Hi Rob E., > > I've also sometimes gone for years looking at concepts and had *no* > insights of > > that sudden and direct kind, so I can't say that there is any direct > relation. > > But I'm sure there is an indirect and cumulative relation between > Right View and > > the development of Insight. > > > > What do you think? > > Bingo. Indeed Dan, but with a little illustration from my own limited experience as a middling practitioner of this path (who's trying hard to improve) that may or may not be of some benefit. I found the most important aspect of study for me several years ago was "trangye"--studying the Tibetan sage Je Tsongkhapa's various refutations of the other tenet systems held by some proponents of various schools over the millennia, such as the Vaibhasika, Sautrantika, Yogacara, and "lower" Madhyamika. This was an in-depth of several flavors of wrong views that did more for my understanding of what is measnt by Right View than any other approach I'd come across in my study of thje Dharma. Of course, I could have never been ready for this without FIRST having practiced getting rid of my intense aversion to othjer sentient beings through the practice of tonglen (giving and taking compassion using the breath as object). All that study of Right View would have made no difference to me at the point my mind was filled with ill-will toward sentient beings, as it had been until I was set straight on the practice of tonglen and had practiced that for many, many months, until my heart turned from sour and cynical to being somewhat more open and accommodating. When these preparations were there--in terms of having cultivatad a somewhat kinder, gentler heart--not to mention the sila of having abandoned driking to the point of heedlessness, THEN (just looking back on my own mind-state) the study of Right View became the most important factor in my practice of the Dharma. Right View as taught to me by my lama through his presentation of Je Tsongkhapa's in his "Essence of Eloquence" showed me how to properly analyze positions (views) like "Mind Only". These etachings showed me where I'd been going wrong, and how to analyze and refute the view that "mind" exists as an absolute entity (the view I had been clinging to--nearly a solipisistic one). This study was still, of course, combined with ongoing tonglen (Tibetann metta-bhavana) with at least one hour a day of anapanasati meditation EVERY DAY WITHOUT FAIL, until mental and physical lightness and pliancy and tranquility became well-established, until even jhana while riding the subway was possible, and there was real viriya combined with real passadhi and upekkha at most times, and even greater piti in jhana meditation than normal throughout the day (not to mention I dropped about two hours of sleep a night because a few minutes in the rapture of jhana is like an hour or more of sleep). Mind you thhis is not even any kind of mastery of jhana, but "good enough" for a beginner, and good enough that within a few moments of sitting down, bodily fabrications were calmed and concentration firmly established, and within moments after that the "circulating fountain of bliss" arose, and then shortly thereafter, just calm, unshakeable concentration, taking emptiness of the "I, me, mine" as the object of meditation stepping in & out of the jhanas. In other words, a full combination of samatha and vipashayana, as taught in my system (which is based on Master Kamalasila's "Bhavana Krama" or the "Progressive Stages" [of meditation]). This practice was ALSO combined also with serious confidence in my ability to "get" Right View: strong faith (saddha) in the Buddha's teachings, as well as in my lama's understanding and that he was teaching Right View. My confidence grew after being shown, via reasoning and logic, how nothing has independent existence, that nothing exists absolutely (unestablished apart from conditions), that all things are composed of other things and therefore subject to cessation. Nagarjuna's "Verses from the Middle Way" were (and are) of immense help in this, I must say. Every waking moment of my life was centered on the Dharma in some way at this time, every contemplation a meditation on how things lack self-nature yet still exist by way of convention, and NEVER the discarding of conventions like accumulating wholsome kamma either-- working diligently on practices like tonglen, since my lama taught us that merit and wisdom are like "two wings on a bird" that work in tandem to bring to fruition the realization that destroys how we incorrectly hold to objects as being self-existent, and the direct realization of emptiness or anatta is the ultimate (and only) antidote to the sufferings of samsara. So not just the study of Right View, but many, many things that all come together at the same time, which for thse khandas involved at least two hours a day of the textual study of the Dhamma in addition to every moment I could recall practices like tonglen and the meditation on emptiness, along with jhana practice daily for at least an hour (preceded by mantra recitations--an excellent form of samatha meditation, BTW, not to mention great metta-bhavana cultivation with "OM MANI PEMA HUNG" and the like), until the aforementioned factors were all energized to the point they all came together in a flash of a single moment that changed everything. So while I agree with you that Right View IS forerunner, and I'd never deny that, and the study of Right View is key. AND YET, without the more mundane practices it would have been for me a worthless theoretical exercise by itself. That is a danger of clinging to the view of anatta often spoken of (Nagarjuna called those who take anatta/e,ptiness as a view as "incurable" for example)--that it becomes a VIEW in itself, that it becomes so important it makes things like cultivating a good heart seem like a pointless endeavor. The reason I spend so much time on this point here is that I really believe that the Middle Way propounded by the Buddha means just that: it's about finding the right balance, striking the "sweet spot"--like the lute-string: not too tight, nor too loose. And it is very easy to become too tight on the study of anatta to the exclusion of accumulating merit (or too loose), or too tight on the practice of accumulating merit to the exclusion of the study of Right View (or too loose). The Path is the Middle Way between these extremes. When there is too much emphasis on either Right View OR the accumulation of merit and wholesome states of mind (which by themselves we all know don't lead to anything other than pleasant results--they MUST be combined with Right View to actualize the Buddha's path), then practice becomes lopsided and yields no fruit, and one will never find the Middle Way between the extremes of no-existence and true existence. 9013 From: frank kuan Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 9:16pm Subject: unintentional humor often the best "Poetry is the art of substantiating shadows, and of lending existence to nothing." - Edmund Burke In other words, poetry is the exact opposite of cultivation :-) How deplorable the human state is! We want permanence when all signs indicate otherwise, we chase after happiness and multiply dukkha instead. -fk 9014 From: Sarah Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 9:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello - Jesse Hello, Jesse, --- Jesse Dhillon wrote: > Hello, > I just joined this list on the recommendation of a friend on IRC. I got > into Buddhism just a short while ago, and I am trying to read the various > suttas as I find them. I may not be very knowledgeable or useful in the > various discussions, so I will just watch for the time being. Thanks. Thanks for joining us and sending this intro....I sincerely hope you find this list useful. Please ask any questions about the suttas and feel free to let us know if there is something being discussed that you'd like clarification on or if you have a comment of your own. Most of us are not very knowledgeable here, but we just try to give each other a little support and encouragement. > "Subject to decay are all component things; strive earnestly to work out > your own salvation." This is an important quote and reminder which is interpreted in different ways, I think.... Btw, I have two little questions: May I ask what IRC is? Where do you live, Jesse? (answers are optional;-)) Hope to hear from you later, Best wishes, Sarah 9015 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 10:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi Howard > > > Howard: > > > How's the following? > > > *********************************************** > > > Samyutta Nikaya XXXVI.9 > > > > > > Anicca Sutta > > > > > > > > Impermanent > > > > > > Translated from the Pali by Nyanaponika Thera. > > > For free distribution only. > > > From > > > HREF="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel303.html"> > > Contemplation > > > of Feeling: The Discourse-grouping on the Feelings (WH > > > 303), translated from the Pali by Nyanaponika Thera (Kandy: Buddhist > > > > > > Publication Society, 1983). Copyright ©1983 Buddhist Publication > > > Society. > > > Used with permission. "The three kinds of feelings, O monks, are > > > impermanent, > > > compounded, dependently arisen, liable to destruction, to > evanescence,> to fading away, to cessation -- namely, pleasant feeling, painful feeling and neutral feeling." > > > **************************************** > > > I find "... liable to DESTRUCTION, to evanescence, to fading > > > away, to CESSATION ..." [emphases mine] to be fairly clear. On the other hand, if all that you mean by impermanence not meaning destruction is that there are no truly independent, self-existing "things" to begin with, and hence none to be destroyed, I would agree with you. But that is not how you have expressed it. If you mean something else, then I'm afraid that I just don'tunderstand> you. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > k: Yes that is what I meant all dhammas are empty by nature, so what > is there to be destroyed. All dhammas are of one nature, what is there > to destroyed. All are unborn, what is there to be destroyed since it was > not born in the first place. Feelings can never be destroyed because it > comes from nowhere and it goes to nowhere, how do we destroyed something > that has no fixations. It is only when our "self" is involved, we though > it has a fixations. Even when we talk abt feelings (cetasika), where > does it go after it cease or where does it come out from? > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Ahhh! Understood. No disagreement then on this. > -------------------------------------------------------------------- k: Then I think you are back to the same question, do cittas cease? I feel that the sutta defintion is not congruent with what you have agreed with my point of view. What is your point of view on cittas cease? > > k: Isn't calm, insight, lovingkindness, compassion, sympathetic > > joy, also common to a lot of religion? > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > There are two exceptions, as I see it. Only through practicing > the dhamma in its entirety, in my opinion, are the heights of insight and unshakable calm attainable. Through sila and concentration alone, which are the parts of the Buddha's path that appear elsewhere, only *limited* calm and insight are attainable. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- k: Only through anatta then we are different from the rest of the religions bc most religions has a self attached view. Since all cittas are anatta, it does not care whether we infer it as kusala or akusala, it will still perform its role. By attached values on citta, is discrimination a self on anatta. Furthemore to explain why I say kusala depends on aksuala. Firstly, how do we not know what is detachment if we do not realised what is attachment. How do we know what is joy if we do not know what is sad? These discrimination arise bc of our condition thinking. Since cittas are anatta, it is us who "fixed" such a meaning. Paradoxically we need such a meaning to know what is good what is bad (it is like a reference book), but the practise I more incline to interpret is Buddha urges us not to attached to both sides. It is a practise of non fixations (sati) since cittas or cetasikas have no fixations. ---------------------------------------------------- > > > > k: Yes I am more incline to say that the leadership of the whole > practise is right understanding. I am not saying that we should not followed the eight noble path, what I am trying to point out is when we are > mindful, sila is not a major factor anymore, it all falls in line. Just like when you are meditating. Are you concern abt right or wrong, or just pure attention. Even when anger arise, it will not affect you. You become > an > observer of anger, or greed. Similarily, when we are mindful, we > cannot do things that are of wrong actions, all sila automatically falls in line.> When we have right concentration, it is even better (conventional > sense). > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Conventional right understanding is very important throughout, > and when augmented by the other seven path practices, led by mindfulness, > there eventually arises supermundane right understanding (or wisdom), which, in turn, leads to liberation. > ----------------------------------------------------------- k: I agreed with you on right understanding which I will describe as the steering wheel. Right Mindfullness is the engine. Kind regards Kenneth Ong 9016 From: Jesse Dhillon Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 0:06am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] unintentional humor often the best >In other words, poetry is the exact opposite of >cultivation :-) How deplorable the human state is! We >want permanence when all signs indicate otherwise, we >chase after happiness and multiply dukkha instead. > >-fk Perhaps Bishop Berkeley put this in a good way. He said that empiricists, who pride themselves on making measurements and divisions out of the world cannot, in fact, justify the belief that there is a mind-independent world which exists outside of our consciousnesses. This is contradictory to the very logic they profess, as this would mean that there are "objects" in the "real world" which we believe to exist, even though we can never directly observe them; we only observe them through our grid of senses. He is really saying that there is nothing independent of ourselves, and that we forget this and believe that the world, our bodies, and our minds are real because we are ignorant of the fact that we can't justify our belief in this. We observe nothing. Nothing observes us. Just my humble opinion. Jesse Dhillon. "Subject to decay are all component things; strive earnestly to work out your own salvation." 9017 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 0:16am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lisa's question Dear Rob Ep and Lisa, Rob Ep wrote this post (below) recently and I thought it was beautifully written with a good explanation as to why some people like himself 'have been attracted to this list'.... I might quibble over a few minor points, but I thought the 'gist' was spot on and very sincere. Lisa, as I was clearing out old posts, I thought of your question and wondered if you might find it helpful. I know Rob Ep will be delighted if you wish to pursue any of his comments further..... Thanks Rob....;-) Sarah --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Kenneth, > I think the answer for most on this list is that the deepest nature of both > beings > and phenomena are anatta and anicca. I have not been used to looking at > anatta as > a 'nature' or essence, since it is a negation and thus doesn't indicate > anything > to me. > > But that is exactly, I think, the point of the pure Theravadins on this list: > > that anatta being the deepest nature of everything, there is absolutely > nothing to > hang onto about oneself or any effect that is caused or any arising > phenomena. > They are all absolutely freely arisen with no causal factor other than the > factors > that have arisen and vanished in the arising conditions immediately prior, > and > previous material or influences which that immediately arising and ceasing > condition has carried with it and passed to the next arising set of > co-arising > conditions. > > Anicca is the complementary component to anatta, because if something has no > central entity, it also has nothing that can outlast the moment. So > impermanence > and non-entity work together to insure that there is nothing to identify as a > real > self, and nothing to hold onto in the shifting stream of time and shifting > conditions and effects. There is nothing to do but sit back and become more > discerning of what is happening. There is no action to take which is not > ordained > by some other action. > > I think this is a very deep and comprehensible philosophy, with a little > effort. > But it is very difficult to take. I think this philosophy is even a good > medicine > for those like myself who believe that there is something else involved in > the > process. Why? Because it erases or reveals the slightest clinging to a > notion of > self. Even if there were that primordial consciousness at the end of the > rainbow > which I feel is there, any notion I may have of it or cling to is in fact not > 'it', because it is also, whatever it is, necessarily beyond clinging to self > or > possession. The surest medicine for everyone, Theravadin or Mahayanist, is > to > know that every notion we have of self or dhamma or Nibbana, is false, and is > just > grist for the mill of discernment. Whatever is at the end of the journey, > this is > still the medicine that erases and reveals all clingings. > > I think that is why some of us that tend towards Mahayana have been attracted > to > this list and its understandings. We who tend to be idealist need a good > dose of > anatta to reveal our subtle clingings to self, and there is no real > substitute for > this. It is a rigorous and demanding process, to eradicate the notion of > something there to hold onto or to 'salvage' from the enlightenment process. > > > We will all agree, I think, that even our most precious notions will have to > be > washed out in the trickle and eventual flood of discernment. > > Regards, > Robert > > =========================== 9018 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 0:31am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Pali Canon on Web Dear Rob Ep, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Sarah, > Is there a complete copy of the Pali Canon translated into English on the > web? I > have downloaded one in Pali, but I'm afraid I can only enjoy it for the pure > poetry of the sound. I know the feeling:-) Some of the Abhidhamma and many of the commentaries are not translated into English at all. Out of those parts which have been translated into English, I'm always very out-of-date as to what is available on the web exactly. Perhaps Mike or Christine can give this info more precisely with links as I know they are always up-to-date and link-friendly;-) ... If you go to bookmarks on the dsg homepage, you'll find links to the Access to Insight and Metta sites that have most the Suttas in English, but precious little Abhidhamma. I forget if the Vinaya is there. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/links Another problem (for some of us) is the quality of the translations which are rather variable. It's really wonderful to have all the Access to Insight translations on the Web and to be able to give easy links, but generally I prefer to read other translations, such as those by B.Bodhi with Commentary notes where possible, which are mostly only in book form. None of the PTS translations are on Web either (as far as I know), but all of this is just a mater of time I'm sure. It is a dilemma for small publishers who would like the materials to be accessible but yet cannot continue to do their work without any income. Sorry, I'm not really the right person to ask, so I hope someone else will help with better information. Sarah 9019 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 0:46am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Tales from India Hi Jon, it's me;-) --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > This is written from my office on Monday morning, which seems another > world altogether from the sights, sounds and smells of just 24 hours ago, > but in the absolute sense is, as we know in theory at least, different > only in terms of the shape-and-form and detail (nimitta and anupayancanna > -- sometimes translated as 'outward appearance and particulars') appearing > through those doorways. The actual experiencing of objects through the > various doorways remains the same in its essential nature throughout, and > it is this essential nature that is the object of the understanding that > we are urged to develop. Would you kindly elaborate on the nimitta and anupayancanna as mentioned above and the distinction between them in this context. I'd also be interested to hear more about your discussion on characteristics of realities (as opposed to realities) to be known and the 'carbon paper' simile you mentioned briefly to me in the context of Howard's question on the timing of awareness. No rush.... Thanks.... see you after my yoga class;-)) Sar > Leaving the group was for me a classic example of 'sweet sorrow', that is, > both strong pleasant feeling (because of attachment to the good people and > the many fruitful discussions) and sadness (at the fact that it was all > coming to an end) arising alternately and apparently simultaneously. This > was a condition for tears to appear when saying my final goodbye to the > group, but since one still has so much accumulated kilesa, this is only to > be expected I suppose. And any embarrassment I may have felt at this > unseemly exhibition on my part is itself just another example of that > particular kilesa known as mana (seeing oneself as important)! > > There were many useful snippets that came up during the trip, and I will > try to bring these in to posts as and when appropriate. > > For anyone who has the slightest inclination, I would strongly recommend > taking any opportunity to visit the holy places or join any trip that Khun > Sujin is doing (and ideally, of course, to combine both of these if at all > possible). > > It's good to be back with you all. > > Jon > 9020 From: Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 1:54am Subject: Concepts Hi all, Anicca (impermanence) is known as one of the three marks of existence. I assume that anicca is a concept and not a reality to be directly known. For how can awareness of the present moment include awareness of the previous moment, and thus know it's own passing? How can it be a characteristic of a present moment that it is changing? There must always be reference to a previous ie imagined reality for the deduction of change to be made. Some commentators suggest that anicca is the basis for anatta and dukkha. Phenomena are unsatisfactory, because all things change all the time. There is nothing to cling to. Because things change all the time there is no core essence in any phenomenon and vice versa, therefore the notion of a self is only a concept. There is nothing to cling to and noone to do the clinging. So who or what suffers? A concept. And what does it suffer from? The concept of change. And just how real can this suffering be? Regards Herman 9021 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 2:22am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Best wishes, Erik --- rikpa21@y... wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., dalthorp@o... wrote: > > Hey, are you making moves on my wife?! > > Fortunately you're in luck, Dan, because on Sunday I will be > officially married, and my new bride will have none of that sort of > thing, so you're off the hook! I'm just trying to get my flirtation > in while I can still get away with it. Erik You sure are a fast mover! It seems only weeks ago that you were telling Sarah and me over breakfast at the Peninsular Hotel in Bangkok about this charming girl you had come across on an earlier visit to Cambodia, and were planning to visit some time soon. I remarked, only half jokingly, about 'carrying on the story', little thinking that the story would turn into reality (in a purely conventional sense, of course), and in such quick order too. Not a man to beat about the bush! Erik, I wish you and Aert all the very best for a long and happy life together. May you find the hapiness you seek, and may you also grow in understanding. Jon 9022 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 2:25am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Howard & others I have pasted below the entry from Nyanatiloka's 'Buddhist Dictionary' on the subject of the stages in the life-span of a citta. Hope you find it of interest. Jon --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > Dear Howard and sarah, > In "A Comprehensive manual of Abhidhamma" Bhikkhu Bodhip156 Guide to > #6 'The life span of a citta is termed , in the Abhidhamma a > mindmoment(cittakhana). ..in a flash of lightning billions of mind- > moments can elasp. Nevertheless, though seemingly infinetesimal each > mind moment in turn consists of three sub-moments: arising(uppada) > presence(thithi) and dissolution(bhavanga). Within the breath of a > mindmoment a citta arises , performs its momentary function, and then > dissolves, conditioning the next citta in immediate succesion"Endquote > robert Citta-kkhana: 'consciousness-moment', is the time occupied by one single stage in the perceptual process or cognitive series (cittavíthi). This moment again is subdivided into the genetic (uppáda), static (thiti) and dissolving (bhanga) moment. One such moment is said in the commentaries to be of inconceivably short duration and to last not longer than the billionth part of the time occupied by a flash of lightning. However that may be, we ourselves know from experience that it is possible within one single second to dream of innumerable things and events. In Anguttara Nikaya I, 10 it is said: "Nothing, o monks, do I know that changes so rapidly as consciousness. Scarcely anything may be found that could be compared with this so rapidly changing consciousness.". For a sutta source of the 3 stages, see Anguttara Nikaya III, 47-- "There are 3 characteristics of what is conditioned (sankhatassa lakkhaná): an arising (uppádo) is apparent, a passing away (vayo) is apparent, a change in the existing (thitassa aññathattam: Com. = ageing) is apparent" The same 3 phases are mentioned in Samyutta Nikaya XXII, 37, where they are applied to each of the 5 khandha. 9023 From: Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 10:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi, Ken - Our back-and-forth post is getting lengthy - so I will snip away the parts I am not replying to. In a message dated 10/31/01 2:01:34 AM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn@y... writes: > Hi Howard > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Ahhh! Understood. No disagreement then on this. > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > k: Then I think you are back to the same question, do cittas cease? I > feel that the sutta defintion is not congruent with what you have agreed > with my point of view. What is your point of view on cittas cease? > --------------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: First of all, I'm not at all sure that I even accept the notion of cittas in the sense of instantaneous mind-moments! But for purposes of discussion, let me take 'citta' to mean "mind state", without an inference of that being instantaneous. In that case, I would say that in the same conventional sense that cittas arise and exist, they also cease. Whatever arises, ceases. However, in truth, and not just by convention, I don't believe that there ever arise separate cittas; I believe that *we* separate out cittas and dhammas from the general "flux" that is reality, and treat them as if they were substantial, individuated "things". --------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > k: Isn't calm, insight, lovingkindness, compassion, sympathetic > > > joy, also common to a lot of religion? > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > There are two exceptions, as I see it. Only through practicing > > the dhamma in its entirety, in my opinion, are the heights of insight > and unshakable calm attainable. Through sila and concentration alone, > which are the parts of the Buddha's path that appear elsewhere, only > *limited* calm and insight are attainable. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > k: Only through anatta then we are different from the rest of the > religions bc most religions has a self attached view. Since all cittas > are anatta, it does not care whether we infer it as kusala or akusala, it > will still perform its role. By attached values on citta, is > discrimination a self on anatta. > -------------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Anatta is, indeed, the main doctrinal difference between the Dhamma and other religions, and satipatthana is the main difference in practice. But that does not imply that one can attend only to what is different and be a "complete Buddhist". The main difference between a good bakery cake and a mediocre one is butter (let us say), but that doesn't mean that a good cake consists only of butter! With regard to not distinguishing between kusala and akusala because both are sunya, by the same reasoning there is no need to distingish between a Buddha and a Hitler! Seeing clearly the nature of conventional things is important, even when realizing at the same time that there are, in reality, no such things. From the Mahayana perspective, which I understand is yours, consider the Diamond-Cutter Sutra. There, Bodhisattvas are encouraged to assist all beings towards liberation, while all the while realizing that, ultimately, there are no such beings. Don't forget the notion of "two truths". Until you and I are arahants, we ignore conventional truth at our peril (and the peril of others). -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Furthemore to explain why I say kusala depends on aksuala. Firstly, how > do we not know what is detachment if we do not realised what is > attachment. How do we know what is joy if we do not know what is sad? > --------------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't disagree with you on this. I said that before. The notions, the concepts, of kusala and akusala are mutually dependent, and the understanding of one depends on the understanding of the other. As I pointed out before, however, that conceptual interdependence is a different matter from the conditionality that may or may not hold between kusala and akusala mind states. ------------------------------------------------------------ > These discrimination arise bc of our condition thinking. Since cittas are > anatta, it is us who "fixed" such a meaning. Paradoxically we need such a > meaning to know what is good what is bad (it is like a reference book), > but the practise I more incline to interpret is Buddha urges us not to > attached to both sides. It is a practise of non fixations (sati) since > cittas or cetasikas have no fixations. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: If, by the foregoing, you mean that there is no difference between kusala and akusala states except as we arbitrarily impose, then I strongly disagree. The difference between conventional things is not arbitrary. Your c ertainty that poison is nectar will not protect you when you drink the poison! --------------------------------------------------------------- > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Howard: > > Conventional right understanding is very important throughout, > > and when augmented by the other seven path practices, led by > mindfulness, > > there eventually arises supermundane right understanding (or wisdom), > which, in turn, leads to liberation. > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > k: I agreed with you on right understanding which I will describe as the > steering wheel. Right Mindfullness is the engine. > ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Well, I'm no more an expert on automobiles than I am on chariots! ;-)) But I think your metaphor sounds quite good! ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Kind regards > Kenneth Ong > > ============================== 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) 9024 From: Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 11:02pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Concepts Hi, Herman - In a message dated 10/31/01 4:55:08 AM Eastern Standard Time, hhofman@d... writes: > Some commentators suggest that anicca is the basis for anatta and > dukkha. Phenomena are unsatisfactory, because all things change all > the time. There is nothing to cling to. Because things change all the > time there is no core essence in any phenomenon and vice versa, > therefore the notion of a self is only a concept. There is nothing to > cling to and noone to do the clinging. > > So who or what suffers? A concept. And what does it suffer from? The > concept of change. And just how real can this suffering be? > > ========================== Nagarjuna addressed this very point. If dukkha were truly "real", a true "thing", how could there be an escape from samsara? It is only because dukkha, itself, is empty that freedom is possible. 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) 9025 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 5:26am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi Howard > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > First of all, I'm not at all sure that I even accept the notion > of cittas in the sense of instantaneous mind-moments! But for purposes of discussion, let me take 'citta' to mean "mind state", without an > inference of that being instantaneous. In that case, I would say that in the same conventional sense that cittas arise and exist, they also cease. Whatever arises, ceases. However, in truth, and not just by convention, I don't believe that there ever arise separate cittas; I believe that *we* separate out cittas and dhammas from the general "flux" that is reality, and treat them as if they were substantial, individuated "things". > --------------------------------------------------------- k: To me, I accepted that cittas are momentary. Because feeling, thoughts etc is also momentary hence to me cittas are also momentary. Furthermore there is logic to cittas as a seperate process bc in conventional sense our different part of our brain organ organise different sense faculty. They are also different sense organ doorways, hence there are different cittas or cetasikas involved. Actually I like to know what is the Pali actual words for the Anicca Sutta that you have provided. I like to study more on its Pali words rather than the translations. I wishfully hope that Gayan could translate it:). I like to know whether it was used conventionally or absolutely. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > If, by the foregoing, you mean that there is no difference > between kusala and akusala states except as we arbitrarily impose, then I strongly disagree. The difference between conventional things is not arbitrary. Your certainty that poison is nectar will not protect you when you drink the poison! > --------------------------------------------------------------- k: Conventional yes, we got to know these terms very well so that we do not do evil things and let the mind to become restless. But in absolute terms they are not impt if one is in sati. To further explain why it is not impt, cittas are like mechanical parts of an automobile, one does not know the presence of the other, they just work together. They do not know whether they are the gear or they are the wheel. It just worked together as they suppose to work. It does not care whether it is first or reverse gear. Imposition of good and bad to these cittas is mainly due to our conditioning habits since past countless lifes. In the Mahayana terms, Buddha's wisdom is the same essence as in defilements. There is no difference. Difference arise due to our conditioning of what is wrong or right, good or bad. What is neither right or wrong is beyond conditioning, what is beyond conditioning is inconceivable, what is inconceivable is the same realm as Buddha nature. It is the same as sati practise, neither right nor wrong. No discrimination. If you remember that I say abt feelings, it goes nowhere and it comes from nowhere. It is the same to the other four khandas. One that comes from nowhere and goes to nowhere has no fixation, one has no fixation has no dependency, one has no dependency has no grasping, hence no conditioning, hence the same nature as Buddha nature. Hence that I why I say the nature of citta is the same as Buddha nature in an earlier post. Kind regards Ken O 9026 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 6:12am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya IV Hi Jon >Thus is Nibbána visible in this life, immediate, inviting, attractive, >and comprehensible to the wise" (A. III, 55). k: hmm attractive? Sounds like desiring to be in Nibbana? "Just as a rock of one solid mass remains unshaken by the wind, even so neither visible forms, nor sounds, nor odours, nor tastes, nor bodily impressions, neither the desired nor the undesired, can cause such a one to waver. Steadfast is his mind, gained is deliverance" (A, VI, 55). "Verily, there is an Unborn, Unoriginated, Uncreated, Unformed. If there were not this Unborn, Unoriginated, Uncreated, Unformed, escape from the world of the born, the originated, the created, the formed, would not be possible" (Ud. VIII, 3). k: I think when we are talk abt unborn we should not equate this with the born. Born should be equate with death and not unborn. Undeath is equate with unborn. It is like if there is no creation in the first place, where is there destruction. Furthermore when the commentary talk abt escape from the world of born, isn't it implying we are going from one "born" state to another state "where born does not exist". It sounds like saying that Nibbana is conditioned by the born, because without the born, where is there a state "where born does not exist". "One cannot too often and too emphatically stress the fact that not only for the actual realization of the goal of Nibbána, but also for a theoretical understanding of it, it is an indispensable preliminary condition to grasp fully the truth of anattá (q.v.), the egolessness and insubstantiality of all forms of existence. Without such an understanding, one will necessarily misconceive Nibbána - according to one's either materialistic or metaphysical leanings - either as annihilation of an ego, or as an eternal state of existence into which an ego or self enters or with which it merges. Hence it is said:" k: So what is the point of explaining Nibbana in the first place. That is why I think Buddha says very few points in describing Nibbana. A nature that are beyond words to described. >"Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found; >The deed is, but no doer of the deed is there; k: Since there is no sufferer, where is there suffering in the first place? >Nibbána is, but not the man that enters it; >The path is, but no traveler on it is seen." >(Vis.M. XVI) k: Since there is no traveler, where is there a need for a path to travel? Path is also anatta, same as the traveler, hence where is the path? Kind regards Ken O 9027 From: m. nease Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 7:31am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Pali Canon on Web Hi Sarah and Rob, Sorry to disappoint but I'm not up on abhidhamma on the web either (especially commentaries). The best I can offer are the files and links at http://abhidhamma.org/ and http://www.dhammastudy.com/ I agree with Sarah about Bhikkhu Bodhi's translations, some of which you can find on the web searching by his name, but unfortunately few. mike --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Rob Ep, > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > Dear Sarah, > > Is there a complete copy of the Pali Canon > translated into English on the > > web? I > > have downloaded one in Pali, but I'm afraid I can > only enjoy it for the pure > > poetry of the sound. > > I know the feeling:-) > > Some of the Abhidhamma and many of the commentaries > are not translated into > English at all. Out of those parts which have been > translated into English, I'm > always very out-of-date as to what is available on > the web exactly. Perhaps > Mike or Christine can give this info more precisely > with links as I know they > are always up-to-date and link-friendly;-) ... > > If you go to bookmarks on the dsg homepage, you'll > find links to the Access to > Insight and Metta sites that have most the Suttas in > English, but precious > little Abhidhamma. I forget if the Vinaya is there. > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/links > > Another problem (for some of us) is the quality of > the translations which are > rather variable. It's really wonderful to have all > the Access to Insight > translations on the Web and to be able to give easy > links, but generally I > prefer to read other translations, such as those by > B.Bodhi with Commentary > notes where possible, which are mostly only in book > form. None of the PTS > translations are on Web either (as far as I know), > but all of this is just a > mater of time I'm sure. It is a dilemma for small > publishers who would like the > materials to be accessible but yet cannot continue > to do their work without any > income. > > Sorry, I'm not really the right person to ask, so I > hope someone else will help > with better information. > > Sarah > > 9028 From: Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 8:06am Subject: Re: Udana-Nibbana 4 --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > K: Sarah, I appreciate your kind patient in imparting true understanding > of the Nibbana concepts. I like to point out that I agreed with you that > Nibbana is anatta. on the other hand what I trying to point out is that > isn't this nature even though anatta also a "nature" on its own right. > Isn't it similiar to Mahayana, concept of Buddha Nature or Unborn. Hi Kenneth, Nibbana is a LABEL that is applied to the absence of the defilements of greed, hatred, and delusion. In this way it is a "nature" (absence of the defilements), but not a "nature" in the sense that if we just scratch the surface of ourselves, or if we just purify enough we'll find this mysterious entity underneath it all called "Buddha-nature" that's just been hidden away all this time, some hidden Self, for example. Buddha-nature correctly interpreted by Mahayana commentators refers to the POTENTIAL of all sentient beings to realize perfect enlightenment. It is not a thing-in-itself, a Universal Mind or somesuch, some permanent entity or substratum underlying all reality. Even the Zen patriarch Hui Neng, for example, when he uses the term "Self", simultaneously rejects independent existence. Anatta/emptiness refers to the fact that all things lack fixed or permanent nature (which would entail the consequence that they have existed for all time and will continue to exist for all time, unchanged, and unchanging, not to mention unchangeable). The "nature" part of anatta refers to the fact that all composed things are composed of other things, implying that nothing has any "core" or true "essence" or "entity" or "identity", that "realness" is a mere mental construct dependent on our own conditioning, which we impose onto a bunch of composed parts (in turn composed of yet more parts), in the same way we disignate a "chair" a chair in dependence on legs, a cushion, etc. There is no truly existent "chair" there, no "chairness" to be found among the legs, the cushion, the backrest. "Chair" is merely a concept, and thus unreal ultimately. Yet conventionally it performs the function of supporting your behind all the same! Anatta also says that that there is not truly any "oneness", nor is there truly "manyness"--meaning things are neither one nor many--this is the Middle Way betwen saying things exist as "things in themselves" and denying things exist at all. Furthermore, all composed things are impermanent, undergoing constant change, and as such this also implies they are devoid of any intrinsic or permanent "self". This is the atta (self) denied by the teaching of anatta, which is implied by anicca (impermanence), which in turn implies dukkha (suffering), since we tend to cling to these impermenent fabrications as "real", since we are under the spell that they truly exist. As a result, we experience pain as a result of this ignorance of their true nature, because we either attach to them if they appear pleasurable (and thus get upset when they change or disappear on us, which is inevitable following the law of impermanence), or feel aversion and disgust toward them if they appear unpleasant. The point is to come to see that there is nothing in the triple-realm that possesses intrinsic identity (self, atta), that even we sentient beings, as composed entities, also lack substantial entity. Once this undersatnding is permanently established (as it is for arahats) then all suffering ceases, because all the causes for suffering have been eradicated, starved of their fuel (the ignorance that conceives of an "I, me, mine"). This delusion is permanently abolished in those who have brought the Buddhist path to completion. 9029 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 9:27am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Udana-Nibbana 4 HI Erik > > Hi Kenneth, > > Nibbana is a LABEL that is applied to the absence of the defilements > of greed, hatred, and delusion. In this way it is a "nature" (absence > of the defilements), but not a "nature" in the sense that if we just > scratch the surface of ourselves, or if we just purify enough we'll > find this mysterious entity underneath it all called "Buddha-nature" > that's just been hidden away all this time, some hidden Self, for > example. k: For the Thervadans, that is their definition but for Mahayana that is not the definitions. Because all defilements are empty by nature hence they have the same essence as Buddha's wisdoms. There is no discrimination bc if there is discrimination, it shows dependency. If there is dependecy, there is conditioning. > > Buddha-nature correctly interpreted by Mahayana commentators refers > to the POTENTIAL of all sentient beings to realize perfect > enlightenment. It is not a thing-in-itself, a Universal Mind or > somesuch, some permanent entity or substratum underlying all reality. > Even the Zen patriarch Hui Neng, for example, when he uses the > term "Self", simultaneously rejects independent existence. k: Buddha Nature can be interpreted in many ways in many context. It depends on the situation. On one hand it can be interpreted as the potential, while on the other, it can be interpreted as emptiness. because Buddha nature is empty by nature. > Anatta/emptiness refers to the fact that all things lack fixed or > permanent nature (which would entail the consequence that they have > existed for all time and will continue to exist for all time, > unchanged, and unchanging, not to mention unchangeable). The "nature" > part of anatta refers to the fact that all composed things are > composed of other things, implying that nothing has any "core" or > true "essence" or "entity" or "identity", that "realness" is a mere > mental construct dependent on our own conditioning, which we impose > onto a bunch of composed parts (in turn composed of yet more parts), > in the same way we disignate a "chair" a chair in dependence on legs, > a cushion, etc. > > There is no truly existent "chair" there, no "chairness" to be found > among the legs, the cushion, the backrest. "Chair" is merely a > concept, and thus unreal ultimately. Yet conventionally it performs > the function of supporting your behind all the same! Anatta also says > that that there is not truly any "oneness", nor is there > truly "manyness"--meaning things are neither one nor many--this is > the Middle Way betwen saying things exist as "things in themselves" > and denying things exist at all. k: Buddism is beyond dualism and oneness bc they are both end of the spectrum. When we talk abt the chair, it neither exist nor not exist. If it does not exist, why are you seeing it. If it exist, where is its nature. > > Furthermore, all composed things are impermanent, undergoing constant > change, and as such this also implies they are devoid of any > intrinsic or permanent "self". This is the atta (self) denied by the > teaching of anatta, which is implied by anicca (impermanence), which > in turn implies dukkha (suffering), since we tend to cling to these > impermenent fabrications as "real", since we are under the spell that > they truly exist. As a result, we experience pain as a result of this > ignorance of their true nature, because we either attach to them if > they appear pleasurable (and thus get upset when they change or > disappear on us, which is inevitable following the law of > impermanence), or feel aversion and disgust toward them if they > appear unpleasant. > k: I thought that is what I said on the other post I defined impermanent as "every changing", not creating or destroying. What we experience is also empty by nature. Because it goes nowhere and comes from nowhere. It only "appear" when there is the right of causes and conditions and "disappear" when the causes and contions are absent. Furthermore, where is there to experience if one is in sati. Where is aversion if one is in sati. Where is suffering is one is in sati. > The point is to come to see that there is nothing in the triple-realm > that possesses intrinsic identity (self, atta), that even we sentient > beings, as composed entities, also lack substantial entity. Once this > undersatnding is permanently established (as it is for arahats) then > all suffering ceases, because all the causes for suffering have been > eradicated, starved of their fuel (the ignorance that conceives of > an "I, me, mine"). This delusion is permanently abolished in those > who have brought the Buddhist path to completion. k: I agree with you wholeheartedly that we must understand anicca, anatta and dukkha in order to have right understanding and practise the eight noble path deligently and follow it every moment of our life. I believe in this path and I am convinced this path is the way. Such a conviction is develop not by blinding following what Buddha says in the suttas. It is the actual practise of what it is taught in the sutta and then investigate it whether it conforms to the wise. As a result, we are able to grow confidence in Buddhism and this is the kalama spirit, henceforth our understanding is further increase or reinforce, and not by studying or reading the numerous suttas. In fact if we look at the Pali Cannon closely, it drills on the same few concepts of anatta, anicca, dukkha and sati. It is just represented differently in different wordings. Now what I am saying is something I like to point out the differences in our understanding of certain concepts. What Buddha is teaching is "is not" to conteract our "is" conditioning for humans. But his method of practise is beyond "is not" and "is". All dhammas by nature is beyond "is not" and "is". This is the concept of Mahayana emptiness. The Thervada concept of emptiness is different from the Mahayana bc Thervada defintion is on "is not" spectrum while the Mahayana concept of emptiness is beyond "is not" and "is". There is always a substantiality reality issue in Buddhism because we are trying to define Nibbana as "is not" which in fact Nibbana is beyond "is not" and "is". We cannot define Nibbana as free of defilements bc it is "is not". Words is very inadequate to describe such a state. Its beyond words as it is beyond dualism and oneness. Kind regards Ken O 9030 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 0:58pm Subject: Re: online Canon/Roberrt E. Dear Robert, I am not sure if you have found the info. you're after - very busy at work this last week or two (Hospital being audited and accredited..... hopefully). So I have not caught up with the posts - and may never do so if all of you keep up the current pace! :-) These few links may be helpful: Access to Insight - Canon http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/index.html Sacred Texts of Buddhism http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/index.htm Tipitaka http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/index.htm Majjhima Nikaya at: http://www.budsas.org/ebud/majjhima/index.htm Some sites are more comprehensive than others. But all have only a portion of the whole. I would really like to know more of the Commentaries, my interest has been piqued by members of this list. Could anyone assist by listing what would be good to buy, where to buy and what to start with? metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Sarah, > Is there a complete copy of the Pali Canon translated into English on the web? I > have downloaded one in Pali, but I'm afraid I can only enjoy it for the pure > poetry of the sound. > > Robert Ep. > 9031 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 1:17pm Subject: A thought about Pali Dear Rob E. and All, Would it be worthwhile learning Pali? I notice that there are a number of sites for groups and courses devoted to this. Then you CD copy would come in handy.:-) I guess it all comes down to Money vs limited Time and Effort, and choices on where to expend either one. metta, Christine 9032 From: Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 2:22pm Subject: Re: Concepts Howard, Thank you for this and all your other responses. I may not always acknowledge each and everyone of them, but be assured I read, digest and appreciate them. There is tremendous profundity in your reply. Regards Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Herman - > > In a message dated 10/31/01 4:55:08 AM Eastern Standard Time, > hhofman@d... writes: > > > > Some commentators suggest that anicca is the basis for anatta and > > dukkha. Phenomena are unsatisfactory, because all things change all > > the time. There is nothing to cling to. Because things change all the > > time there is no core essence in any phenomenon and vice versa, > > therefore the notion of a self is only a concept. There is nothing to > > cling to and noone to do the clinging. > > > > So who or what suffers? A concept. And what does it suffer from? The > > concept of change. And just how real can this suffering be? > > > > > ========================== > Nagarjuna addressed this very point. If dukkha were truly "real", a > true "thing", how could there be an escape from samsara? It is only because > dukkha, itself, is empty that freedom is possible. > > 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) 9033 From: Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 6:04pm Subject: Re: online Canon/Roberrt E. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Christine Forsyth" wrote: > > . > I would really like to know more of the Commentaries, my interest has > been piqued by members of this list. > > Could anyone assist by listing what would be good to buy, where to > buy and what to start with? > > metta, > Christine > >___________ Dear Christine, I recommend : Net of views Bhikkhu Bodhi BPS The Root of existence Bhikkhu Bodhi BPS The Discourse on the fruits of recluseship Bhikkhu Bodhi BPS The Dispeller of Delusion (2volume set) Pali Text society The Expositor, Pali text society The Dhammapada (commentary) by John Ross Carter and Palihawadana Buddhist legends (3vol.set) Burlingame Jataka (3vol.set) Cowell PTS the udana commentary (masefield) PTS Vimana stories (masefield) PTS You could start at the top and work down. I also recommend ANY books by Nina van Gorkom http://www.zolag.co.uk (she always quotes suttas and commentaries) robert 9034 From: Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 7:17pm Subject: Re: Udana-Nibbana 4 --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: Hello Kenneth, > > Nibbana is a LABEL that is applied to the absence of the defilements > > of greed, hatred, and delusion. > k: For the Thervadans, that is their definition but for Mahayana that is > not the definitions. It is the Mahayana definition--at least, it's the definition given me by my Tibetan teachers. I think they're what some would label Mahayana! (though of course those are mere labels for the same Buddhadharma) > Because all defilements are empty by nature hence > they have the same essence as Buddha's wisdoms. Indeed they do. > There is no discrimination > bc if there is discrimination, it shows dependency. There is no ULTIMATE discrimination, but here's where problems arise interpreting this. Some take it to mean that ultimate non-difference in emptiness means there is no conventional difference between composed entities, or any meaningful distinction between good and evil. While neither exist "truly", in the ultimate sense--from the perspective of ultimate truth (paramattha sacca)--there is one hell (or heaven) of a big difference in conventional terms! :) It is key, important to understand the difference between the two truths, and how they apply. To hold to the conventional at the expense of the ultimate is to fall into one extreme--the extreme of true existence; to hold to to ultimate is to fall into the other extreme, the extreme of non-existence. Je Tsongkhapa notes: "A person's entered the path that pleases the Buddhas When for all objects, in the cycle or beyond, He sees that cause and effect can never fail, And when for him they lose all solid appearance. "You've yet to realize the thought of the Able As long as two ideas seem to you disparate: The appearance of things-infallible interdependence; And emptiness-beyond taking any position. "At some point, they no longer alternate, come together; Just seeing that interdependence never fails Brings realization that destroys how you hold to objects, And then your analysis with view is complete. "In addition the appearance prevents the existence extreme; Emptiness that of non-existence, and if You see how emptiness shows in cause and effect You'll never be stolen off by extreme views." > If there is dependecy, there is conditioning. Indeed, and dependent origination is the flipside complement of anatta; without dependency, no anatta/emptiness. > > Buddha-nature correctly interpreted by Mahayana commentators refers > > to the POTENTIAL of all sentient beings to realize perfect > > enlightenment. > k: Buddha Nature can be interpreted in many ways in many context. It > depends on the situation. On one hand it can be interpreted as the > potential, while on the other, it can be interpreted as emptiness. > because Buddha nature is empty by nature. This emptiness implies the potential for Buddhahood, and what you just said is exactly what one of my teachers said as well, just FYI-- our Buddha-nature IS our emptiness. And if we were not conditioned, as Howard quoted from Nagarjuna (if memory serves), then we would never have a chance of getting out of samsara. So two ways of saying essentially the same thing. > Furthermore, where > is there to experience if one is in sati. Where is aversion if one is in > sati. Where is suffering is one is in sati. In sati, mindfulness, there can definitely be a "me" there experincing the arising and passing away of sensation, for example-- even at a very subtle level. That is not true in the direct perception of emptiness, however, where this "I, me, mine" is demolished at the root. > k: I agree with you wholeheartedly that we must understand anicca, > anatta and dukkha in order to have right understanding and practise the > eight noble path deligently and follow it every moment of our life. I > believe in this path and I am convinced this path is the way. Such a > conviction is develop not by blinding following what Buddha says in the > suttas. It is the actual practise of what it is taught in the sutta and > then investigate it whether it conforms to the wise. Indeed! All that theory has to be APLLIED, and TESTED in daily life, incessantly. Only then can the truth of the Buddha's teachings be verified. > Now what I am saying is something I like to point out the differences in > our understanding of certain concepts. > > What Buddha is teaching is "is not" to conteract our "is" conditioning > for humans. But his method of practise is beyond "is not" and "is". All > dhammas by nature is beyond "is not" and "is". This sounds to me like another way of saying that the Buddha teaches the Middle Way between the extreme of non-existence and true existence. I see differences in the way it is being phrased, but not it the general meaning. > This is the concept of Mahayana emptiness. The Thervada concept of emptiness is different from > the Mahayana bc Thervada defintion is on "is not" spectrum while the > Mahayana concept of emptiness is beyond "is not" and "is". Not the case at all. When the Theravada is understood properly there is no difference between anatta and emptiness. There CAN'T be, because both refer to the fact that lings lack "core" or true entitiness. Please forget for a moment these labels Theravada and Mahayana. They're of little use in discussing anatta/emptiness, which are, in fact, when investigated, referring to the very same thing. > There is always a substantiality reality issue in Buddhism because we > are trying to define Nibbana as "is not" which in fact Nibbana is beyond > "is not" and "is". I think it is important not to get hung up on the verbal descriptions of Nibbana here (or any verbal descriptions, for that matter, since they represent views, not realities). The negations applied to Nibbana in all systems are specifically to get past the "is" "is not" false dichotomy by helping us let go of our clinging to VIEWS of "is" or "is not". > We cannot define Nibbana as free of defilements bc it > is "is not". Words is very inadequate to describe such a state. Its > beyond words as it is beyond dualism and oneness. We have to define Nibbana verbally if only in a pedagogical sense. Of course Nibbana lies beyond all words and descriptions. Nevertheless, it can be very helpful to understand what it is NOT, because in this way, the views the block direct apprehension of Nibbana can be relinquished. 9035 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 10:21pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1& 3 AND 5 Dear Rob Ep, Sarah: >> From the commentaries: >>since it is possible to speak of the gloom and of a need for that >>gloom’s scattering to be maintained by a sun and a moon >>(only)........therefore there is therein, in that nibbana, neither, vz.sun nor >>moon; in this way he indicates the fact of nibbana having as its own >>nature solely of light.(aalokasabhaavata.m). and as > > the Dhamma-king was explaining to those monks lacking complete >>penetration the ultra-profound, extremely hard to see, abstruse and >>subtle, extremely choice, (yet) not formerly experienced (by them), even >>in a dream, within this sa.msaara that is without beginning, ....... .................... Rob Ep: > Two points: > 1/ Nibbana is here said to be 'solely of the nature of light'. I don't see > in > any way how this description can be reconciled with Nibbana being 'purely the > ending of defilements'. What in the ending of defilements gives Nibbana > 'solely > the nature of light'? .................... Sarah: I don't think I've described or quoted Nibbana as being 'purely the ending of defilements'. Defilements are finally eradicated at the final stage of enlightenment (arahatship). Nibbana is the object of the lokuttara cittas at each stage of enlightenment. I understand the 'nature of Light' to be metaphorical and opposed to the nature of darkness so often associated with the khandhas of grasping ('aloko' for light also came up in one of Gayan's translations to refer to nibbana and in contrast to the darkness seen for those of us with avijja or ignorance). For the arahat, there are no longer any conditions for the arising of defilements. Of course, there were never defilements or any darkness in Nibbana. ..................... Rob Ep: >I would say nothing, and that the 'light nature' of > Nibbana > must come from another source, the light of pure consciousness. What other > light > could give it this nature? I am open to another explanation of this > statement. .................... Sarah: I think all I can say without really speculating wildly, is that nama is a nama, and light as I've discussed. It is not citta (consciousness), but is experienced by cittas (lokuttara cittas).....and as arammana (object) is a condition for these cittas. May I just stress that cittas (or vi~n~naana) always refer to conditioned realities in the Pali Canon and not to nibbana. Let me quote this paragraph from the Vism, XV1, n.18: ********************************* '......So, because the kind of knowledge that has formed dhammas as its object and that which has conventional truth as its object are both incapable of abandoning defilements by cutting them off, there must (consequently) exist an object for the noble-path knowledge that effects their abandonment by cutting them off, (which object must be) of a kind opposite to both, and it is this that is the unformed element. 'Likewise, the words "Bhikkhus, there is an unborn, an unbecome, an unmade, an unformed" and so on, which demonstrate the existingness of nibbana in the ultimate sense, are not misleading because they are spoken by the blessed One, like the words "All formations are impermanent, all formations are painful, all DHAMMAS (states) are not self" (DH. 277-79; A.i,286, etc)...' ******************************* I think my point was meant to be that it is the 'noble-path knowledge' rather than nibbana that 'effects their abandonment by cutting them off'. .................... Rob Ep: > 2/ The following passage in which Nibbana is described as 'abstruse and > subtle, > extremely choice, not formerly experienced even in a dream' seems to very > much > describe a definitive experience, not merely a negative experience of > defilements > ended. > Does it seem to you that this description of the most choice experience that > few > have experienced suggests a state of nullity? It suggests to me a state of > the > most refined, pure experience possible to experience, which is enabled by the > defilements having been put to rest. .................... Sarah: Btw, almost identical words are used to these ones I quoted from the Commentaryand the ones that followed in certain suttas such as in SN 370. Yes, I certainy don't have any idea of this as a 'negative experience' or a 'state of nullity' either. At the moments of the lokuttara cittas experiencing nibbana, there is no idea of defilements 'having been put to rest'. These realisations are in the reviewing processes following the experience of nibbana from what I understand. Again I would not refer to nibbana as experience, but certainly the lokuttara cittas which experience it must be very refined and pure as you suggest. .................... Rob Ep: > To me at least, it seems to be very much the case that the commentaries, > perhaps > even more than the Suttas themselves, suggest a state of prized experience in > which human awareness reaches its fruition. .................... Sarah: Yes. (Remember there are 4 stages of enlughtenment). Even now, as we take some baby steps, a moment of awareness is precious and prized, in that for this brief instant, there is no darkness or ignorance. We really cannot comprehend what highly developed 8fold path factors are like or what it is like to have no defilements. We can, however, begin to learn about the characteristics of sati (awareness) and panna(understanding) and begin to know more about what is appearing right now. .................... Rob Ep: >I can't go beyond that, but I > can't > see this as a description of merely seeing into the complete Anatta of > everything. > And this is not even suggested in these passages. .................... Sarah: Let's just say that the 3 characteristics of realities, anicca, dukkha and anatta have to be vey clearly understood at different stages prior to the arising of the lokuttara cittas. it will depend on conditions as to which characteristic is apparent just pior to the lokuttara cittas.....but really I'd need to read up further here as I'm again getting into deep water;-) .................... Rob Ep: > I do not exaggerate when I say that I am anxious to hear your response and to > engage with this question. ..................... Sarah: The main point I'd like to stress is the distinction between the conditioned, impermanent cittas which experience nibbana and the unconditioned reality which is experienced and which doesn't 'do' or 'experience' anything. Rob, I really am not exaggerating either when I say I really have never considered much about nibbana at all before. However, I think the more understanding and awareness there is of namas and rupas in daily life, the easier it is to understand whichever part of the Teachings it is we're reading and to have confidence in their truth and value. Even just a very little understanding is very, very helpful. Let me finish by quoting the final passage I’d like to raise from the commentary to the Sutta: You’ll remember that the last line of the Sutta was ‘This alone is the end of dukkha (es’ ev’ anto dukkhassa): ‘This alone is the end of dukkha: this- that is to say, nibbana with aforementioned characteristics that was praised, extolled, with the phrases “Without foundation” and so on - alone is the end, the culmination, of the entire dukkha belonging to the cycle, on account of the absence of all dukkha when there be attainment thereof; he therefore indicates the same, viz. “the end of dukkha”, to be its own nature.’ This has already got rather long, so I won't add more comments (I think I've already made too many in any case;-)) Sarah 9036 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 10:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi Ken O, I have 4 posts from you waiting for replies...if you don't mind, I'm going to try and run through the main points briefly as Rob Ep just 'took' most my computer time;-) > > S: Hmmm....It’s true that mundane cittas acompanied by panna (more and > > more highly developed) and the other necessary wholesome cetasikas > eventually condition the lokuttara cittas. Conditions are very complex, so > I wouldn’t call these cittas ‘the resultant’, nor do I understand your > first sentence above. Nibbana is not conditioned by any cittas. It is > expereinced (the object of) the lokuttara cittas. Sorry if I sound very > ‘finicky’, but the dhamma is very precise, I think. > k: No I do not agreed. We cannot use this basis to divert the point. We > got to admit weakness if there are, as like when I point out there is > substantiality issues in Buddhism. Well I've shown you my pali canon sources (and you mentioned you don't agree with the Commentary). As we are discussing the pali canon Tipitaka here, perhaps you can show me your sources. I haven't found any 'weakness' or 'substantiality issues' and would need to see your texts before commenting further. > > S: There’s been a lot of discussion on this issue (see ‘useful posts’ > > under nibbana perhaps...) Many people here find it very difficult to > accept that the unconditioned (Nibbana) is experienced by the conditioned > (lokuttara cittas), but that’s how it is in the Pali canon as indicated in > my previous quote. > k: It is the same thing when I say cittas don't die, you find it difficult > to believe me. We read about the momentary death of all realities. There is death of citta now and now and now....I believe what I read in the Teachings as confirmed by a little understanding of realities which is being developed. > k: It is we classify those sati, metta, other wholesome practises as > kusala cittas and during such kusala cittas there is no akusala cittas. > Buddha urge us to do kusala cittas but he did not classify that if we have > kusala cittas there is no akusala present in this kusala itself. Because > kusala does not equate akusala. It is like using another "self" to > replace a "self". Furthermore as I have said earlier, kusala and akusala > both depend on each other to be in existence, hence it is not permanent. > To do kusala like metta is conventional so that the mind is more peaceful > but these do not help us to attain arahant bc all religion urges goodness > but they do not attain arahant bc they are one sided in their practise. > In his method of sati, there is no right or wrong just pure attention to > what arise. If we have pure attention what arise, it is very difficult to > do bad or to be attached. Sorry my understanding does not base on > commentaries, it is base on practise that I feel this is the point and > plus Mahayana doctrinal influences and relooking at sati sutras. As I stressed in my post yesterday to Rob Ep, sati (awareness) has the characteristic of being aware, of being 'watchful' of whatever reality is experienced now. It guards the citta from akusala for a moment only. As you rightly say, it is only 'concerned' to be aware of the reality. it doesn't care or 'discriminate' as to which reality it is aware of. It'll depend on all those complex conditions. There are different levels of sati and it is not 'owned' by Buddhists. However, it was only the Buddha who taught about the development of satipatthana, the awareness and understanding of realities as not self. At these moments, the reality is known just 'as it is'. There is no confusion of mixing up of kusala and akusala states for that moment. They are known for what they are, but I agree that at these moments there is detachment and not minding about what reality is experienced. I think we're partly in agreement here at least, Ken ;-) sarah 9037 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 10:49pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1& 3 Hi again, --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Sarah > >S: I would just like to emphasise that the 'worlds' are referring to the > > worlds of khandhas which do not exist in nibbana. also this passage > stresses that nibbana is not and has never been experienced in samsara and > is only ever experienced by the highly developed wisdom, able to penetrate > or see the ‘ultra profound’. > k: Isn't this just describing there exist a nature without khandhas, > isn't that an outter ego also. It's true that we read nibbana has its own 'sabhava' or nature (ie it is not 'nothing'). I don't know what you mean by 'outer ego' here. >S: There is no hint that nibbana is ‘one’s true nature’ as I read it;-) > k: I know there is no hint of 'one' true nature, but is it still a nature > that is described. Nature or characteistic, but not self. just as if we talk about a nature or characteristic of seeing, it doesn't mean there is any self or 'one's true nature'. > >S: There are just one or two more passages I’d like to quote next time. > k: :) I would most happy to read it. Thanks for your keen interest and encouragement, Ken. Sarah 9038 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 11:19pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 & 2 Hi Ken, no.3;-) --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > k: Isn't commentary also basing on their own experience :). No offence > here, to me, we got to use the Kalama approach even to the commentary or > to the sutta. I agree that it's helpful to question and consider carefully. The commentary is not just 'basing on their own experience' as I understand. It's not a personal opinion, but the recorded joint wisdom of the Theras who recited the Buddha's Teachings with the added explanations as needed at the councils of arahats. I have had no experience of nibbana and can only discuss it conceptually, but I fully accept what this group of arahats (whose wisdom has been recognised since those times) were relaying the Buddha's wisdom. Furthermore, all the commentary notes I read accord with what is taught in the Suttas themselves. > k: Buddha has always limited in his description in Nibbana even less for > PariNibbana. How would a commentary explain what Buddha does not wish to > explain further in the sutta. If it is that impt, Buddha would have > explain again and again just like what he do to sati, anatta, anicca. In short, for those of us who can only discuss nibbana conceptually, i question how useful it is to talk more on Nibbana except, as Erik mentioned, to find out what 'it is not' and thus help to get rid of wrong views. The emphasis in the Buddha's Teachings, as I read them, is on helping and encouraging us to understand realities now. This is the only way the path can be developed. The rest, we may say is 'academic'. Only by undestanding these realities will there even be the correct idea conceptually about what nibbana or parinibbana are. > >S: No, I don't think so. When we refer to sabhava or nature in Theravada > > texts, there is no hint or inner or outer ego or substantiality. Where > does the Buddha refuse to answer here? Quite a lot has been written on the > ‘sabhava thread’ (another popular one for those from a mahayana > background). Please refer to ‘Useful Posts’ under ‘Sabhava’. > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts> > k: Isn't Sabhava also a sustaintiality or nature issue. How do I explain > to you. No matter how we see Buddhism be it PariNibbana or Nibbana is > always this issue of a state or nature of PariNibbana or Nibbana. Isn't > this nature Nibbana or Parinibbana is also an substance in a sense. You're understanding 'sabhava' with a different meaning to that understood in the theravada texts. As we read and understand this term, I stress there is no self or substantiality involved. Each reality has a characteristic...Seeing has the characteristic of experiencing a rupa through the eye-sense. This characteristic is different from the characteristic of hearing or sound. We don't need to use the word sabhava at all. > Thervada use words like Sabhava to escape this fundamental questions, > Mahayana escape by using emptiness, unborn to explain this question. Even > anatta is itself is a substantiality issue if we look at the other way > round from non self. Isn't non self dependent on self to be non self? > Just a thinker :). I don't see this escape plot at all myself. Non-self is the nature of all realities. 'Self' is a concept which is not based on reality but which results from ignorance and wrong view. I think, Ken, it only seems that there are escape plots and a lack of answers when realities are not understood precisely enough by panna. > k: Sarah, I respect your upholding of the sutta. I value the tripakata > same as you. But to me, I do not think we should accept just as it is. > Understanding can be improve if we are willing to look at other school of > thoughts. From different school of thoughts and I realise that from each > school the weaknesses of one school could be explain in another school of > thought. We all come from different cultures, backgrounds and have read different texts and schools of thought. I would always encourage anyone to read whatever seems helpful to them and like you do so very well, to question and challenge and make sure one is really understanding what is said rather than just agreeing for that easy life:-) Having said that, I have to tell you that I don't share your perception of the 'weaknesses' in the Pali Canon and have always found (with some excellent guidance) that it has always provided all the answers for me. This may be unusual I realise;-) One short response to follow.... Sarah 9039 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 11:32pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 4 Hi again Ken, This will be even quicker as I have students coming very soon:-) --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Sarah > K: Sarah, I appreciate your kind patient in imparting true understanding > of the Nibbana concepts. I like to point out that I agreed with you that > Nibbana is anatta. on the other hand what I trying to point out is that > isn't this nature even though anatta also a "nature" on its own right. > Isn't it similiar to Mahayana, concept of Buddha Nature or Unborn. I > hope I am being clear abt what I think. Thanks for your kind comments too, Ken. It's always a pleasure to talk to you. (I won't comment on the mahayana ideas and understandings though.) I agree with you when you (I think) when you mention a 'nature' in its own right..... (hope this isn't a trap now, Ken;-) Back to 'seeing'....as I just said, it has the characteristic of experiencing visible object, it's a nama, distinct from a rupa, and so on. Furthermore, each moment of 'seeing' is different to another moment of 'seeing' and although it shares these characteristics, it has another characteristic or nature depending on all the conditions which 'produce' it at that moment and not at any other moment. And then, it falls away, instantly, never to return again. It's not 'my' seeing or 'me' who sees...just a reality with a 'sabhava' and characteristics. No self or thing in it. Anatta is one of the 3 lakhana (special characteristics) which are common to all conditioned realities and in the case of anatta to nibbana too. Hope this helps. i really think that we need to learn more about realities which can be understood and 'tested' at this moment. Look forward to hearing back.....(no hurry;-)) Sarah 9040 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Oct 31, 2001 11:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi Sarah > > There are different levels of sati and it is not 'owned' by Buddhists. k: No one owns anything. if you can own something, please give some to me :). cheers > However, it was only the Buddha who taught about the development of satipatthana, the awareness and understanding of realities as not self. At these moments, the reality is known just 'as it is'. There is no confusion of mixing up of kusala and akusala states for that moment. They are known for what they are, but I agree that at these moments there is detachment and not minding about what reality is experienced. > > I think we're partly in agreement here at least, Ken ;-) > > sarah k: Sarah its ok even if you disagree with me. Its all a mind game :). I think its time to let go of talking abt Nibbana bc in the end that is not the focus of our practise. Personnally I feel this will end up not going anywhere and I apologise for making you spending so much of your time responding to my post. I hope you are not offended if you kindly let me have the privilege to end this discussion on Nibbana. Kind regards Kenneth Ong 9041 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 0:27am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Udana-Nibbana 4 Hello Erik > > It is the Mahayana definition--at least, it's the definition given me > by my Tibetan teachers. I think they're what some would label > Mahayana! (though of course those are mere labels for the same > Buddhadharma) k: Yes all are just labels :). > > > There is no discrimination > > bc if there is discrimination, it shows dependency. > > There is no ULTIMATE discrimination, but here's where problems arise > interpreting this. Some take it to mean that ultimate non-difference > in emptiness means there is no conventional difference between > composed entities, or any meaningful distinction between good > and evil. > > While neither exist "truly", in the ultimate sense--from the > perspective of ultimate truth (paramattha sacca)--there is one hell > (or heaven) of a big difference in conventional terms! :) It is key, > important to understand the difference between the two truths, and > how they apply. To hold to the conventional at the expense of the > ultimate is to fall into one extreme--the extreme of true existence; > to hold to to ultimate is to fall into the other extreme, the extreme > of non-existence. Je Tsongkhapa notes: k: Sometimes that is the problem. When are we refering to conventional and when are we trying our best to talk abt absolute. It can be misread and misrepresentated at times. Yes I agree with you 100% that conventional truth is definitely impt bc we are conventional pple :). > "A person's entered the path that pleases the Buddhas > When for all objects, in the cycle or beyond, > He sees that cause and effect can never fail, > And when for him they lose all solid appearance. > > "You've yet to realize the thought of the Able > As long as two ideas seem to you disparate: > The appearance of things-infallible interdependence; > And emptiness-beyond taking any position. > > "At some point, they no longer alternate, come together; > Just seeing that interdependence never fails > Brings realization that destroys how you hold to objects, > And then your analysis with view is complete. > > "In addition the appearance prevents the existence extreme; > Emptiness that of non-existence, and if > You see how emptiness shows in cause and effect > You'll never be stolen off by extreme views." k; Yes dhamma always on the middle path, neither exist nor non exist. Sticking to one extreme, it will not help us at all. Emptiness is a concept not for conventional pple. It is for pple who have realise the relinquishment of self. > > This emptiness implies the potential for Buddhahood, and what you > just said is exactly what one of my teachers said as well, just FYI-- > our Buddha-nature IS our emptiness. And if we were not conditioned, > as Howard quoted from Nagarjuna (if memory serves), then we would > never have a chance of getting out of samsara. So two ways of saying > essentially the same thing. k: :). > > > Furthermore, where > > is there to experience if one is in sati. Where is aversion if one > is in > > sati. Where is suffering is one is in sati. > > In sati, mindfulness, there can definitely be a "me" there > experincing the arising and passing away of sensation, for example-- > even at a very subtle level. That is not true in the direct > perception of emptiness, however, where this "I, me, mine" is > demolished at the root. k: We must not be purposely be in sati. We let it sati comes naturally. No "self" effort in a sense involved. No matter what method we used there is still this presence of *me* involved, but a method is still needed which is non discrimination and of middle path. Even though we know that sticking to oneness is the way out of dualism, we still stick to it. > Not the case at all. When the Theravada is understood properly there > is no difference between anatta and emptiness. There CAN'T be, > because both refer to the fact that lings lack "core" or true > entitiness. Please forget for a moment these labels Theravada and > Mahayana. They're of little use in discussing anatta/emptiness, which > are, in fact, when investigated, referring to the very same thing. k: I do not agree. If you look at sunnata explaination and those presented by Mahayana, There is a difference. A subtle difference. What Thervada defintion of emptiness is base on deviod of *self*. It is still attached to *non self*. But in Mahayana it is beyond *self and non self*. Hence it is always say by Buddha in many times in Mahayana sutta, it is beyond human words but emptiness in Thervada is still can be described in words. > > We have to define Nibbana verbally if only in a pedagogical sense. Of > course Nibbana lies beyond all words and descriptions. Nevertheless, > it can be very helpful to understand what it is NOT, because in this > way, the views the block direct apprehension of Nibbana can be > relinquished. k: Nope we cannot do that bc it is attaching to one a *NOT* concept. It is just like pointing this NOT is condition by what it "IS NOT". We can never use *NOT* bc it is a conditionality by *IS*. I think further discussion of Nibbana will end up with no definite answer due to the diffculty in defining it in human words. I would like to seek your kind permission to allow me not to discuss this issue anymore similar to the request I have with Sarah. I apologise if I have cause much inconveniences to you in responding to my post. Kind regards Kenneth Ong 9042 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 1:52am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello... Lisa Hi, and welcome to the list from me. Thanks for posting your question. --- lisa14850@y... wrote: > I'm Dan's wife, and he's been after me for a while to join this group > and introduce myself. Shortly after we were married, Dan dragged me > to a meditation retreat. Thereafter, I went willingly to another two > or three, but not since we had kids. Dan and I don't get much time > together these days, but when we do, he tries to explain Dhamma to me. > I always get bogged down in the Pali terminology. Last time we had > one of these conversations, I asked him a question that he told me to > post here: If one doesn't have wisdom, how does one choose the right > action? Yes, as your question implies, the quality of any action depends on the quality of the mind-state that accompanies the action, and not on some objective appraisal of the action as observed by another (or by oneself, for that matter). It is for this reason that, in the ultimate sense, intention *is* action. Any action that is accompanied by a wholesome (kusala) mind-state is ‘right’ action in one sense of the word. However, as your question also implies, action that is accompanied by wisdom (Pali: ‘panna’) is of a higher level of wholesomeness (‘rightness’) than action that is accompanied by wholesomeness of other levels. Wisdom (panna) itself is of different levels. However, the wisdom that is unique to the Buddha’s teaching is the wisdom that *understands the true nature of the reality that appears at the present moment*. This is sometimes lost sight of in the rush to reach enlightenment. We instinctively incline to the idea that factors such as less unwholesomeness (akusala) in our normal lives, a benign and serene manner, ‘worldly wisdom’ in making decisions, special experiences in our ‘practice’ or perhaps even the acquisition of certain powers are indicative of progress along the path and are desirable goals in themselves. However, none of these is a necessary outcome, to any marked degree, of the development of the understanding I have mentioned, which just sees the characteristic of a reality arising now as it truly is. Our task is really to begin to develop that understanding. Our actions can only ever be as ‘right’ as the level of understanding that accompanies them, and this is not something over which we have any control. So in a sense we don’t need to consider how to achieve ‘right’ action. But we do need to learn a lot more about how to develop right understanding (wisdom/panna). I hasten to add that nothing I have said is meant to imply that wholesomeness (kusala) of levels less than wisdom (panna) should not be of concern to us. The Buddha encouraged kusala of all kinds, and any moment of kusala is extremely valuable since it accumulates and is never ‘lost’. But only the development of panna can support the development of other kinds of kusala in the long run, since this will be a condition for us to ‘find’ the dhamma again and again in the future. Jon 9043 From: Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 2:06am Subject: Re: Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi Sarah et al, > Well I've shown you my pali canon sources (and you mentioned you don't agree > with the Commentary). As we are discussing the pali canon Tipitaka here, > perhaps you can show me your sources. The Tipitaka , to me, is the three baskets, Vinaya, Suttas, Abhidhamma. Not the commentaries. Who knows, in a hundred years some of the posts on this site may be included in the commentaries of the future (heaven forbid :-) ) For clarification only, are we discussing the Tipitaka on this site, or the commentaries as well. And does the present moment play a part ? Did you know that rupas lasting 17 cittas or whatever is not mentioned in the Abhidhamma? Much like the Trinity not rating a mention in the Bible. Are commentators experiencers or theoreticians? If it turns out that we are studying books, we may as well subscribe to a morticians forum. (My opinion only) Regards Herman 9044 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 2:17am Subject: Re: online Canon/Roberrt E. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > Dear Christine, > I recommend : > Net of views Bhikkhu Bodhi BPS > The Root of existence Bhikkhu Bodhi BPS > The Discourse on the fruits of recluseship Bhikkhu Bodhi BPS > The Dispeller of Delusion (2volume set) Pali Text society > The Expositor, Pali text society > The Dhammapada (commentary) by John Ross Carter and Palihawadana > Buddhist legends (3vol.set) Burlingame > Jataka (3vol.set) Cowell PTS > the udana commentary (masefield) PTS > Vimana stories (masefield) PTS > > You could start at the top and work down. I also recommend ANY books > by Nina van Gorkom http://www.zolag.co.uk > (she always quotes suttas and commentaries) > > > robert Dear Robert, Much appreciation. Thank you. metta, Christine 9045 From: Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 2:58am Subject: Re: Udana-Nibbana 4 --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: Hello Kenneth, > > Not the case at all. When the Theravada is understood properly there > > is no difference between anatta and emptiness. There CAN'T be, > > because both refer to the fact that lings lack "core" or true > > entitiness. Please forget for a moment these labels Theravada and > > Mahayana. They're of little use in discussing anatta/emptiness, which > > are, in fact, when investigated, referring to the very same thing. > > k: I do not agree. If you look at sunnata explaination and those > presented by Mahayana, There is a difference. A subtle difference. OK, and what difference is that, specifically? More specifically than the description below: > What > Thervada defintion of emptiness is base on deviod of *self*. It is still > attached to *non self*. "IT" is attached to non-self? Let me pose you a question. Is stating the fact that "there is presently no purple elephant presently occupying my room" identical to ATTACHMENT "to no purple elephant presently occupying my room"? What is important is know9ing that anatta refers to. There is much debate on what constitutes "self", and this is covered in depth in at least the study of "trangye" I underwent with my lama, where the various understandings of what constitute "self" are taken apart and analyzed. For example, som hold that thre is s difference between the "self of persons" and the "self of phenomena"; that no-self refers to a refutation of the self of the person, but that phenomena possess core, or instrinsic nature. This is one way somehave misinterpreted anatta, in specific, in the Sautrantika school. This distinction between the "gross self" vs. the "suibtle self" is even maintained by Mahayana Madhyamika (Svatantrika) commentators like Bhaviviveka, who asserted a difference bwtween the self of persons and the self of phenomena. This is thoroughly rejecetd by the correct school, the Madhyamika-Prasangika system (Middle Way Consequence School) of the Gelukpas, who deny that ANYTHING has core, or essence, not the person, not phenomena, that anatta (emptiness) refers to the absence of this substantial core. This is Right View, both in the Mahayana and in the Theravada. There is not a hair of difference between the two. > But in Mahayana it is beyond *self and non self*. Not "beyond". Neither. BIG difference. beyond implies something apart from, separate. Individuated. Essence. Think about it for a moment. It's beyond taking any positions (views), but NOT "beyond" in any metaphysical sense! > Hence it is always say by Buddha in many times in Mahayana sutta, it is > beyond human words but emptiness in Thervada is still can be described in > words. Let's continue this. I have a friend (Dhamma friend) knocking at my door now, so I have to run. More when I return from Cambodia! 9046 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 3:24am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Udana-Nibbana 4 Hello Erik, > > > What Thervada defintion of emptiness is base on deviod of *self*. It is still attached to *non self*. k: Yes that is what I saying, "non self" is the antidote for the six realms but for the enlighted ones. Beyond "non self" and "self" is the realm of Buddhas. > > "IT" is attached to non-self? Let me pose you a question. Is stating > the fact that "there is presently no purple elephant presently > occupying my room" identical to ATTACHMENT "to no purple elephant > presently occupying my room"? k: Why not, bc of fixation of ideas :). It all depends what is our initial response or in fact our conditioning mind. When we say no or yes, there is already a response that this is right and this wrong. This is always our usual response due to conditioning. > > What is important is know9ing that anatta refers to. There is much > debate on what constitutes "self", and this is covered in depth in at > least the study of "trangye" I underwent with my lama, where the > various understandings of what constitute "self" are taken apart and > analyzed. > k: I got no problem with the meaning of anatta. I like anatta because it is the antidote for *self*. I am contesting the meaning of sunnatta by Thervada and the meaning of emptiness of Mahayana. I am saying there are not the same. > For example, som hold that thre is s difference between the "self of > persons" and the "self of phenomena"; that no-self refers to a > refutation of the self of the person, but that phenomena possess > core, or instrinsic nature. This is one way somehave misinterpreted > anatta, in specific, in the Sautrantika school. This distinction > between the "gross self" vs. the "suibtle self" is even maintained by > Mahayana Madhyamika (Svatantrika) commentators like Bhaviviveka, who > asserted a difference bwtween the self of persons and the self of > phenomena. This is thoroughly rejecetd by the correct school, the > Madhyamika-Prasangika system (Middle Way Consequence School) of the > Gelukpas, who deny that ANYTHING has core, or essence, not the > person, not phenomena, that anatta (emptiness) refers to the absence > of this substantial core. This is Right View, both in the Mahayana > and in the Theravada. There is not a hair of difference between the > two. > > But in Mahayana it is beyond *self and non self*. > > Not "beyond". Neither. BIG difference. beyond implies something apart > from, separate. Individuated. Essence. Think about it for a moment. k; I know what you are trying to say. But that is the fundamental problem when one try to describe something that is beyond words. This is emptiness, beyond words. If it can be describe, then it is not emptiness. Any word expressing it is wrong. Hence ZEN master when teach emptiness in a class, the master remain quiet bc any word by him is a form of substantiality. Sunatta sounds very similar to Mahayana emptines but it is not bc they can be describe and be understanded by ordinary pple like us. Emptiness of Mahayana is the play field of the enlighted and not us. Emptiness is just conveniently used by the Mahayana. We could use the word like Buddha Nature or Unborn. > Let's continue this. I have a friend (Dhamma friend) knocking at my > door now, so I have to run. More when I return from Cambodia! > k: Enjoy your trip :) It always a pleasure to talk to you. Kind regards Kenneth Ong 9047 From: Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 4:11am Subject: Tipitaka and commentaries --- Dear Herman, This web site lists the Tipitaka and all commentaries and tikas that were recited at the last Buddhist council http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/archive.htm The commentaries are: ..>>>ATTHAKATHAS The Pali Tipitaka Atthakathas as approved by the Sixth Buddhist Council (Chattha Sangayana) are as follows, the size of each book is the same as that of the Pali Canon Books Commentaries (Atthakathas) (51 Volumes). 1. Digha Nikaya (Silakkhandha vagga) Atthakatha. (pp. 338). 2. Digha Nikaya Mahavagga Atthakatha (pp. 403). 3. Digha Nikaya Pathikavagga Atthakatha (pp. 251). 4. Mulapannasa AtthakathaVol. I (pp. 398) 5. Mulapannasa AtthakathaVol. II (pp. 320) 6. Mulapannasa AtthakathaVol. III (pp. 309). 6. Majjhimapannasa Atthakatha (pp. 309) 7. Upari-pannasa Atthakatha (pp. 254). 8. Sagathavagga (Samyutta) Atthakatha (pp. 325). 9. Nidanavagga and Khandha (Samyutta) Atthakatha (pp. 324). 10. Salayatanavagga & Mahavagga (Samyutta) Atthakatha (pp. 341). 11. Anguttara AtthakathaVol. I. (pp. 416). 12. Anguttara Atthakatha Vol. II (pp. 397) 13. Anguttara Atthakatha Vol. III (pp. pp. 357 14. Parajikakanda Atthakatha Vol. I. (pp. 346). 15. Parajikakanda Atthakatha Vol. II. (pp. 312). 16. Pacityadi Atthakatha (pp. 437). 17. Culavaggadi Atthakatha (pp. 265). 18. Kankhavitarani Atthakatha(pp. 357). 19. Vinaya Sangaha Atthakatha(pp. 468). 20. Atthasalini Atthakatha (pp. 454) 21. Sammoha Vinodani Atthakatha (pp. 508). 22. Panca pakarana Atthakatha (pp. 499). 23. Khuddakapatha Atthakatha (pp. 216). 24. Dhammapada AtthakathaVol. I. (pp. 447). 25. Dhammapada Atthakatha. 26. Udana Atthakatha(pp. 393). 27. Itivuttaka Atthakatha (pp. 355) 28. Suttanipata Atthakatha Vol. I. (pp. 314) 29. Suttanipata AtthakathaVol. II. (pp. 324) 30. Vimanavatthu Atthakatha (pp. 335) 31. Petavatthu (pp. 270) 32. Patisambhidamagga Atthakatha Vol. I. (pp. 345). 33. Patisambhidamagga Atthakatha Vol. II. (pp. 323). 34. Visuddhimagga AtthakathaVol. I. (pp. 370). 35. Visuddhimagga AtthakathaVol. II. (pp. 353). 36. Thera Gatha AtthakathaVol. I. (pp. 485). 37. Thera Gatha Atthakatha Vol. II. (pp. 546). 38. Theri Gatha Atthakatha(pp. 305). 39. Apadana AtthakathaVol. I. (pp. 403). 40. Apadana AtthakathaVol. II. (pp. 303) 41. Jataka AtthakathaVol. I. (pp. 538). 42. Jataka AtthakathaVol. II. (pp. 408). 43. Jataka AtthakathaVol. III. (pp. 517). 44. Jataka AtthakathaVol. IV. (pp. 504) 45. Jataka AtthakathaVol. V. (pp. 553). 46. Jataka Atthakatha Vol. VI. (pp. 332). 47. Jataka Atthakatha Vol.VII. (pp. 387). 48. Cula Niddesa and Netti Atthakatha (pp. 276). 49. Maha Niddesa Atthakatha (pp. 419). 50. Buddhavamsa Atthakatha (pp. 354), 51. Cariya Pitaka Atthakatha (pp. 328) TIKAS The Pali Tipitaka Tikas as approved by the Sixth Buddhist Council (Chattha Sangayana) are as follows; the size of each book is the same as that of the Pali Canon Books:— Sub-Commentaries (Tikas)(26-Volumes). 1. Silakkhandhavagga Abhinava Tika Vol. I. (pp. 500). 2. Silakkhandhavagga Abhinava Tika Vol. II. (pp. 437). 3. Silakkhanahavagga Mula Tika (pp. 405). 4. Mahavagga Tika (pp. 358). 5. Pathikavagga Tika (pp. 292). 6. Mulapannasa Tika Vol. I. (pp. 394). 7. Mulapannasa Tika Vol. II. (pp. 324). 8. Majjhima & Uparipannasa Tika (pp. 442). 9.Samyutta Tika Vol. I (pp. 345) 10. Samyutta TikaVol. II. (pp. 551). 11. Anguttara TikaVol. I (pp. 288). 12. Anguttara Tika Vol. II. (pp. 396). 13. Anguttara Tika Vol. III.(pp. 371). 14. Sarattha Dipani TikaVol . I (pp. 460). 15. Sarattha Dipani TikaVol. II. (pp. 448). 16. Sarattha Dipani TikaVol. III. (pp. 496). 17. Vimativinodani TikaVol. I. (pp. 362). 18. Vimativinodani TikaVol. II. (pp. 322) 19.Vajirabuddhi Tika (pp. 585) 20. Dhammasangani Mula Tika (pp. 220) 21. Vibhanga Mula Tikaand (pp. 229) 22. Pancapakarana Mula Tika and Anutika(pp. 323). 23. Visuddhimagga Maha Tika Vol. I. (pp. 46l). 24. Visuddhimagga Maha Tika Vol. II. (pp. 533). 25. Netti Tika and Netti Vibhavini Tika (pp. 356). 26. Kankhavitarani Purana and Abhinava Tika Only a handful of these have been translated into English to my great regret. The guidelines to Dhammastudygroup says: Agreement By subscribing to DhammaStudyGroup, you agree to follow the guidelines prescribed here. Posts We welcome any questions, answers, or comments, however light- hearted, relating to the Buddha's teachings as found in the texts of the Theravada tradition (including the Suttanta, Abhidhamma, Vinaya and the ancient commentaries). Endquote http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/DSG_Guidelines This doesn't mean that there can be no disagreement with any points in the commentaries or even the Tipitaka. best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., hhofman@d... wrote: > Hi Sarah et al, > > > The Tipitaka , to me, is the three baskets, Vinaya, Suttas, > Abhidhamma. Not the commentaries. Who knows, in a hundred years some > of the posts on this site may be included in the commentaries of the > future (heaven forbid :-) ) > > For clarification only, are we discussing the Tipitaka on this site, > or the commentaries as well. And does the present moment play a part ? > Did you know that rupas lasting 17 cittas or whatever is not > mentioned in the Abhidhamma? Much like the Trinity not rating a > mention in the Bible. Are commentators experiencers or theoreticians? > > If it turns out that we are studying books, we may as well subscribe > to a morticians forum. (My opinion only) > > Regards > > > Herman 9048 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 5:50am Subject: Morticians forum- Herman Hi Herman, Interesting comments which I'm glad to hear;-)...I'll even let them jump the queue and do a quick reply... --- hhofman@d... wrote: > The Tipitaka , to me, is the three baskets, Vinaya, Suttas, > Abhidhamma. Not the commentaries. Who knows, in a hundred years some > of the posts on this site may be included in the commentaries of the > future (heaven forbid :-) ) Well at least you've included the Abhidhamma;-) I think the Abhidhamma commentaries have always been included and recited together with the Abhidhamma, which is not 'complete' without them. > For clarification only, are we discussing the Tipitaka on this site, > or the commentaries as well. Rob K has just given a detailed response to this..... As I understand it, generally accepted in the Theravada Tipitaka are the ancient commentaries only (down to the Abhidammattha Sangaha), so not any modern commentaries and certainly not anything any of us might write;-) (Heaven forbid as you say...) Like I mentioned when I started the Udana com notes (really only because lines from that particular sutta were often quoted and I thought it might add a little 'depth'), no one has to agree with them and Ken O made it clear that he doesn't. No one has to agree with the Suttas or anything else the Buddha said either, for that matter. >And does the present moment play a part ? In my own opinion, unless we read the texts to help us understand more about the present moment, it's really quite useless. If we read just to become 'abhidhamma experts' or to memorise the details, then there is no respect or appreciation being shown to these same Teachings. However, I really haven't seen any sign of this here and am particularly struck by how sincer everyone here is in terms or really wishing to understand and consider the Dhamma. One thing I've really come to see on dsg, however, is that we're all very different in terms of how much detail and what kind of detail we need to hear and consider in order for 'blocks' and 'wrong views' to be removed. Some people like Num and Kom really appreciate hearing and reading and retaining a lot of very precise detail and it helps them understand more about anatta. Others like Mike or myself tend to 'switch off' when there is too much detail and prefer to consider and reflect on a few lines of a sutta and this seems more helpful. So I don't think we can set any rules, but just see with interest the different accumulations and develop our 'own' understanding of realities appearing now. > Did you know that rupas lasting 17 cittas or whatever is not > mentioned in the Abhidhamma? Much like the Trinity not rating a > mention in the Bible. Are commentators experiencers or theoreticians? I'm pretty impressed that you know this kind of detail, Herman... I know it is mentioned (with some other abhidhamma details which can only be found in the commentaries) by B.Bodhi in his intro. to Abhidamattha Sangaha. Sounds like you must be doing some serious Abhidhamma commentary study to appreciate this, Herman;-) I have no doubt at all that these ancient commentators were 'experiencers' and the evidence suggests that they were all arahats I believe. > If it turns out that we are studying books, we may as well subscribe > to a morticians forum. (My opinion only) Well, I agree that some of my recent threads may have been too 'heavy' for some (many), and I'll happily chat about any daily life or lively topics you'd like to raise;-)) I think it's a good reminder that the aim of any 'study' is not for the sake of book study but for the 'practice' and development of wisdom and other wholesome states. Not quite a 'morticians forum' I hope;-( Thanks for your comments, Herman.. happy to chat to you anytime.... Sarah 9049 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 6:14am Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Focus Hi Sarah > > However, it was only the Buddha who taught about the development of > satipatthana, the awareness and understanding of realities as not self. > At these moments, the reality is known just 'as it is'. There is no > confusion of mixing up of kusala and akusala states for that moment. They are known for what they are, but I agree that at these moments there is detachment and not minding about what reality is experienced. > > > > I think we're partly in agreement here at least, Ken ;-) > > > > sarah If the focal point of practise is not sati for the Abidhammaist (hope you do not mind I use this word), what is their focus. I think the problem lies on the fact that I am a Suttaist, hence sati is the focus. But I do not know abt Abidhammaist bc Abidhammaist classify sati as cetasika. What is the goal or focus? Kind regards Kenneth Ong 9050 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 8:39am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello...[Robert] Robert and Dan, I have a different take on this. I find the description of everything that seems positive in life as really being a hidden negative to be a rather critical view, rather than merely a discerning view. Is our joy at a moment of love really just conceit and attachment? Is the feeling of real confidence just conceit, and a moment of peace really a clinging to quiet? I don't agree with this. I think the really free moments in life which appear unimpeded and functionally unobstructed are real, and that it is the accompanying insecurities, fears and clingings, which are not really that hard to identify -- they always have a nasty feeling somewhere in their occurence -- to be the defilements that interfere with the unimpeded flow of momentary experiences. If we imagine an Arahat's experience after Nibbana and before Parinibbana to be one in which each moment in life is clearly discerned and dealt with without hesitation, confusion or remorse, I would say we all have moments like this, only they are few and far between, and the growing of awareness and lessening of attachment increases the occurence of these kusala cittas. To see all of our 'good' feelings as attachments and delusions seems to me to be almost Christian in its assertion that most of our lives are really 'sins' disguised as good qualities and that we are irrevocably 'bad' in a sense. I don't look at life this way. I see it as inherently illusory but neither good nor bad. Attachment and clinging cause suffering, they are also neither 'good' nor 'bad'. Why not accept and enjoy the moments in life that are not experienced as suffering, and deal with the sufferings and defilements when they arise? Robert Ep. ================================= --- dalthorp@o... wrote: > > From right study and development we find that what we had once > > thought were our strenghts turn out to be faults:our confident > > nature is mostly mana(conceit). The calmness we cherish only > clinging > > to quiet; our directness mostly aversion. > > Magnificent, Venerable Rob! Magnificent, Venerable Rob! Rob has made > the Dhamma clear in many ways, holding up a lamp in the dark for > those with eyesight to see forms. > > Dan was satisfied and delighted in Rob's words. 9051 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 8:26pm Subject: subtle bad states Dear Rob.E, It wasn't very clear from my post ; but I wasn't suggesting trying to change ones personality. A key difference between samatha bhavana and vipassaana is that samatha correctly supresses lobha while vipassana eliminates ignorance. Thus vipassana bhavana is not so much trying to stop any defilements -including subtle clinging and mana - as of understanding them. Panna understands kilesa (as well as other dhammas) and this also leads to a turning away from akusala; but very gradually. By the development of understanding the causes for all types of akusala are better understood - and too, the nature of akusala. The final eradication of kilesa comes about once dhammas are fully understood. Iggleden writes (Intro. to Vibhanga PTS) p.xliv "what is the definition of a bad state? How can it be recognised, not just the obvious ones but those that are really subtle, deep, complicated and hidden from view? This is where adequate study as well as practice is absolutely essential"endquote. On plxvi he writes about greed, aversion and ignorance: "In their more gross forms they sometimes become obvious even to those experiencing thier own false view, speech, action and livelihood...Nevertheless , these 3 bad roots and associated mental factors..are customarily far less obvious in their more usual modes of manisfestation than in their grosser forms. In their even finer and more subtel forms they become so deep and hidden from view that in the great majority of cases they pass quite unnoticed, or indeed are even associted with thought speech and action which is thought to be wise and virtuos, and therefore much to be encouraged" endquote. On pLxvii he says " speech which he had once thought of as correct and pleasing he will find fundamentally to have been directed to his own selfish gain. his whole thought he will find to be a very nest and stronghold of 'evil, bad states'." About tanha he says plxvii "this most difficult to eradicate component of the system of Dependent origination manifests itself in almost every aspect of one's thinking, from the apparently simple consideration 'I am" up to complicated attitude of mind which thinks 'by means of this would that I may be otherwise'endquote robert .... Robert and Dan, I have a different take on this. I find the description of everything that seems positive in life as really being a hidden negative to be a rather critical view, rather than merely a discerning view. Is our joy at a moment of love really just conceit and attachment? Is the feeling of real confidence just conceit, and a moment of peace really a clinging to quiet? I don't agree with this. I think the really free moments in life which appear unimpeded and functionally unobstructed are real, and that it is the accompanying insecurities, fears and clingings, which are not really that hard to identify -- they always have a nasty feeling somewhere in their occurence -- to be the defilements that interfere with the unimpeded flow of momentary experiences. If we imagine an Arahat's experience after Nibbana and before Parinibbana to be one in which each moment in life is clearly discerned and dealt with without hesitation, confusion or remorse, I would say we all have moments like this, only they are few and far between, and the growing of awareness and lessening of attachment increases the occurence of these kusala cittas. To see all of our 'good' feelings as attachments and delusions seems to me to be almost Christian in its assertion that most of our lives are really 'sins' disguised as good qualities and that we are irrevocably 'bad' in a sense. I don't look at life this way. I see it as inherently illusory but neither good nor bad. Attachment and clinging cause suffering, they are also neither 'good' nor 'bad'. Why not accept and enjoy the moments in life that are not experienced as suffering, and deal with the sufferings and defilements when they arise? Robert Ep. -------- A key difference between samatha bhavana and vipassaana is that samatha eliminates lobha while vipassana eliminates ignorance. Thus it is not so much trying to surpress any defilements -including subtle clinging and mana - as of understanding them. Panna understands and this seeing them also leads to a turning away but very gradually. We all of course know the obvious kilesa such as bordeom and strong conceiit and clinging. Everyone sees the dangers in thses whetehr buddhist or not children /other children. 9052 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 8:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] subtle bad states Dear Robert, I understand the need to be aware of subtle states that are other than they seem. I probably should have acknowledged your basic point there. What I was trying to emphasize is that I think we should also acknowledge the subtle and not-so-subtle *undefiled* states that also pop up along the path, as hints of what enlightenment is like. Robert Ep. ===================================== --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear Rob.E, > > It wasn't very clear from my post ; but I wasn't suggesting > trying to change ones personality. > A key difference between samatha bhavana and vipassaana is that > samatha correctly supresses lobha while vipassana eliminates > ignorance. > Thus vipassana bhavana is not so much trying to stop any > defilements -including subtle clinging and mana - as of > understanding them. Panna understands kilesa (as well as other > dhammas) and this also leads to a turning away from akusala; but > very gradually. By the development of understanding the causes > for all types of akusala are better understood - and too, the > nature of akusala. The final eradication of kilesa comes about > once dhammas are fully understood. > Iggleden writes (Intro. to Vibhanga PTS) > p.xliv "what is the definition of a bad state? How can it be > recognised, not just the obvious ones but those that are really > subtle, deep, complicated and hidden from view? This is where > adequate study as well as practice is absolutely > essential"endquote. > On plxvi he writes about greed, aversion and ignorance: "In > their more gross forms they sometimes become obvious even to > those experiencing thier own false view, speech, action and > livelihood...Nevertheless , these 3 bad roots and associated > mental factors..are customarily far less obvious in their more > usual modes of manisfestation than in their grosser forms. In > their even finer and more subtel forms they become so deep and > hidden from view that in the great majority of cases they pass > quite unnoticed, or indeed are even associted with thought > speech and action which is thought to be wise and virtuos, and > therefore much to be encouraged" endquote. > On pLxvii he says " speech which he had once thought of as > correct and pleasing he will find fundamentally to have been > directed to his own selfish gain. his whole thought he will find > to be a very nest and stronghold of 'evil, bad states'." > About tanha he says plxvii "this most difficult to eradicate > component of the system of Dependent origination manifests > itself in almost every aspect of one's thinking, from the > apparently simple consideration 'I am" up to complicated > attitude of mind which thinks 'by means of this would that I may > be otherwise'endquote > robert .... > > Robert and Dan, > I have a different take on this. > > I find the description of everything that seems positive in life > as really > being a > hidden negative to be a rather critical view, rather than merely > a discerning > view. Is our joy at a moment of love really just conceit and > attachment? Is > the > feeling of real confidence just conceit, and a moment of peace > really a clinging > to quiet? I don't agree with this. I think the really free > moments in life > which > appear unimpeded and functionally unobstructed are real, and > that it is the > accompanying insecurities, fears and clingings, which are not > really that hard > to > identify -- they always have a nasty feeling somewhere in their > occurence -- to > be > the defilements that interfere with the unimpeded flow of > momentary experiences. > > If we imagine an Arahat's experience after Nibbana and before > Parinibbana to be > one in which each moment in life is clearly discerned and dealt > with without > hesitation, confusion or remorse, I would say we all have > moments like this, > only > they are few and far between, and the growing of awareness and > lessening of > attachment increases the occurence of these kusala cittas. > > To see all of our 'good' feelings as attachments and delusions > seems to me to be > almost Christian in its assertion that most of our lives are > really 'sins' > disguised as good qualities and that we are irrevocably 'bad' in > a sense. I > don't > look at life this way. I see it as inherently illusory but > neither good nor > bad. > Attachment and clinging cause suffering, they are also neither > 'good' nor > 'bad'. > > Why not accept and enjoy the moments in life that are not > experienced as > suffering, and deal with the sufferings and defilements when > they arise? > > Robert Ep. > -------- > > > > > A key difference between samatha bhavana and vipassaana is that > samatha eliminates lobha while vipassana eliminates ignorance. > Thus it is not so much trying to surpress any defilements > -including subtle clinging and mana - as of understanding them. > Panna understands and this seeing them also leads to a turning > away but very gradually. We all of course know the obvious > kilesa such as bordeom and strong conceiit and clinging. > Everyone sees the dangers in thses whetehr buddhist or not > children /other children. > > > 9053 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 9:01pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Udana-Nibbana 1 --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Erik > > > > I could not agree with you more in this. Ridding the mind of > > unwholseome tendencies is but the first baby-step on the path to > > freedom. So long as there is sufficient craving or aversion present, > > forget getting to the deeper level, the root-controller of that: > > ignorance! And forget insight into the nature of things for that > > reason alone, since craving and aversion will hold so much sway > > ignorance will remain all but invisible, as it is hidden by the > > coarser faculties of craving and aversion. > > > > In other words, forget believing there will be enough of the right > > conditions for insight even into the unpleasant sensations to arise > > without this basic, basic foundation of sila. IT IS SO IMPORTANT to > > cultivate wholesome states of mind, all the time, day in, day out, > > all the time, without fail, to endeavor to see all things that arise > > as opportunities to be turned into skillful activities somehow, using > > the simply threefold formula laid out by Lord Buddha: morality, THEN > > concentration, THEN wisdom. > > > > May all beings gain the wisdom of seeing things-as-they-are, in this > > very lifetime! > > > As I said to Howard, I disagree. It is not cultivating a wholesome state > of mind bc it leads to an attachment to an wholesome state of mind. It is > a practise just being in the present, free of attaching views or fixations > of ideas. It is just there, seeing things as it is. No discriminations, > just in the presence. > > All religions exhorts its fellowers to cultivate wholesome state of mind > but most of them cannot reach Arahantship bc they are attached to one > sided of the practise similiarly to satanic cults, they are attached to > the other side of the practise. I agree Ken. I think the point you have been trying to make lately about attaching to views is very important, and very hard to get. Since every direction we think we are taking on the path is in a sense a view, expectation or anticipation of something not yet experienced, it is almost the same as asking people to give up 'the path', at least the path in their mind. Very hard. That is why the zen concept of beginner's mind is very helpful. To keep going back to understanding that one cannot actually know anything, even the path, except by direct experiencing of its principles in the moment. Robert Ep. 9054 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 9:20pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Dear Sarah, Thanks for being so welcoming to my questions. I very much appreciate your thoughtful answers, and it is also a pleasure to converse on these questions, which as you said, are so 'directly related to....realities to be known now.' That is a very nice definition of the kind of contemplation that attempts to really see into the moment, and to me it is also a very good indicator of real meditation. More comments below: --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Rob Ep, > > I apprecdiated this post of yours, Rob, and the questions and comments raised. > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > Thanks for your help. I found it very clear. I do have a couple of > > questions: > > > > Is there any reason given why only one citta can arise at a time? Why must > > they > > be sequential? If there is no 'mind' in which they are to occur, why or how > > are > > they coordinated in a tight sequential string? > > I think I can only say to the first 2 questions that this is how it is...and > our task is to understand the ‘descriptive’ rather than to reason why.....The > only other answer I may add is that they must be exactly this way and cannot be > any other way because of the complex way conditions (paccaya) cause them to be > like this. So the citta now arises sequentially because of anantara paccaya > which means it is conditioned by the preceeding citta to arise sequentially and > so many, many other conditions to make it be this citta and no other citta > arising. I do think this is a good explanation of why each present moment is both unique and in a sense solitary, even though it is also completely connected to each other factor coming before and after, and all those which surround it in the present. A very clear paradox, but a reality. > So imagine a puppet on thousands of strings, each coordinated and having > effect. The way the puppet moves sequentially is a result of these complex > moves and adjustments (read conditions). > > Or to keep a lingering Indian thread alive, why does an Indian curry on any day > taste just the way it does? Isn’t it because of the particular ingredients, the > quantities of those ingredients on that day, the order and timing they are > added and of course the nature of the tasting, the taste buds, the temperature, > the previous experiences, the place and time of tasting and so on and so on. These are helpful examples. > Only the Buddha can really see and understand all the conditions for a reality > to arise at any time. However, by reading and considering a little more about > conditions (I’m resisting from reminding you of more homework), ha ha, thanks! I already feel guilty enough. it helps to see > there is no mind, form or body as we usually understand. > > > If sati is an 'accompaniment' of a citta when it does occur, rather than a > > citta > > itself, what is it? Where or how does sati arise? Does it 'piggyback' on > > its > > associated citta(s)? Does it also last for specific number of cittas as a > > rupa > > does? How would you define sati? I always thought of mindfulness as being > > 'an > > awareness of being aware'. In other words, for those moments, one is aware > > that > > there is a process of consciousness taking place, rather than merely > > participating > > in the consciousness without realizing it. Is this a definition you would > > accord > > with? > > Excellent questions and considerations, Rob, but I’m not sure my answer will do > them justice > > Yes, sati (awareness) is a mental factor which sometimes accompanies citta > (consciousness). It accompanies all wholesome (kusala) cittas and is aware of > the object for those moments only. It can be aware of any reality, but is not > necessarily (read very seldom if at all) at the level of satipatthana which is > aware of a reality as not self. So for example, if there is generosity or > kindness without ever having heard the Buddha’s teachings, at the moments these > mental states arise with the wholesome cittas, there is sati which is mindful > of what is skilful and prevents that which is unskilful, but not necessarily > accompanied by wisdom. Mindfulness “does not allow the floating away of moral > states” (Atth.) > > Awareness can be aware of any reality, including awareness (sati). As we’ve > discussed recently, strictly speaking, it is not aware of itself but of the > characteristic of sati which has just fallen away. Sati is not aware of a > process, but just of one reality at these times. It’s thinking which thinks > about a process of consciousness. Very good. I am still trying to imagine in a sense what a 'citta' is 'formed like' and how the 'cetasikas' interact or support it, and how 'sati' sort of overlooks or opens insight into the whole thing, and how satipathana, like a mature sati, can see into the full nature of the momentary arising, whereas sati would only see its more obvious qualities...... I'd sort of like a kind of molecular chart of these relationships, however I'm sure in a way that would give the wrong impression that these events are like little 'things' that sit there for a second, when in truth they must be more in the nature of an open quality of mind and not really occupy any place or space but simply co-occur together in spaceless, formless function. Since they really have no entity, it is hard to imagine how they arise or function at all. Unlike the physical realities, which maintain physical forms that sort of 'house' them, the cittas and cetasikas and sati have no such place to dwell. So in a sense it is hard to see how or where they really occur at all. It is only in conjunction with physical sense organs and physical objects, I guess that they can find the conditions to cohere for a moment within the functioning of these mechanisms, and so they are associated with sense-door, mind-door and mind itself. But it would be nice to have alittle more conceptual clarity, which I guess will come in time....and then perhaps obscure their reality even more! thanks for the very useful quote from Nina's book, which I have snipped, but enjoyed. ...I think it’s most useful to consider what are the > realities being experienced at the present moment. By beginning to be aware > (sati being aware) of a nama or rupa (mental or physical phenomena) now, such > as seeing or visible object, feeling or hardness and so on, this is the way > sati develops. Being aware of these different realities, and understanding the > difference between them, is the only way to develop detachment from the idea of > a self or a lasting consciousness. Sati is very precise and has a very specific > function and characteristic. Very good. Thanks for going from my abstract to the clarity of the concrete moment. > > Gee, I really have no hesitation to give you a hard time while your dear > > friends > > and associates are away. If I'm being overly inquisitive, just let me know. > > I > > know you have a schedule beyond our little 'chats'! > > I hope to hear more of these questions. You’re not giving me a hard time at all > and our little ‘chats’ are a joy, Thank you, that warms my heart..... even if I sometimes misunderstand your point, > can’t always provide the answers or am rather slow;-). I wouldn't say so. I think you are sincere and very clear, and I appreciate your level-headedness, something that I've been missing most of my life. I’m particularly > interested in anything further you have to say on this thread which is so > directly related to the present moment and realities to be known now. Thanks, Sarah. I also find it very enjoyable to dig into the possibilities of this present reality. As I said before, I was surprised at my first exposure to the commentaries to find them very illuminating and to have a 'warmth' about them. They seem to understand the 'luminosity of mind' or at least to express it, even if we can't yet get a handle on it ourselves. These conversations with you are very special, a kind of Dhamma oasis for me, for which I give you much thanks. Robert 9055 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 9:27pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 4 --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > K: Sarah, I appreciate your kind patient in imparting true understanding > of the Nibbana concepts. I like to point out that I agreed with you that > Nibbana is anatta. on the other hand what I trying to point out is that > isn't this nature even though anatta also a "nature" on its own right. > Isn't it similiar to Mahayana, concept of Buddha Nature or Unborn. I > hope I am being clear abt what I think. Kenneth, I think the real problem, the really deep problem, is not disagreement but the difficulty of what these suggestions of the Masters really refer to. Whether you say the 'true nature of Nibbana is anatta' or you say it is the 'unborn', you are really faced with the same terrible problem, that these suggestions of the ultimate reality do not refer to *anything*. There is no way that our minds can really comprehend that there is something that is not something, or that there is an experience that is no experience, or that there is a self that is really not-self through and through. All we can do is see these as hints to a reality that is much more profound than we can grasp, that as an *object for our path* can just lead us in the right direction. But we have to be satisifed with *not knowing*, radical not knowing, until the path is ended. Robert Ep. 9056 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 9:30pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello...[Erik] --- Sarah wrote: > Erik, > > > > on Sunday I will be > > > officially married > > ============================= > > Warmest congratulations, Erik!! May you have lifetimes of happiness together. > > > > May I also wish send my bery best wishes to you and Aert. I hope you both have > a very memorable and happy day on Sunday with plenty of wise reflection and > mindfulness. I'm sure we'll all be thinking of you then. Who knows, Aert may be > able and willing to join us on the list as well in time too;-)) > > Your wedding day almost falls on our anniversary (20th) a few days later, but > let me assure you that we're still learning;-) > > With metta and best wishes, > > Sarah congratulations to you, Erik, and to you too Sarah, on your and Jon's upcoming anniversary. That's a long time to not really be entities together! Best, Robert Ep. 9057 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 9:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 --- upasaka@a... wrote: > **************************************** > I find "... liable to DESTRUCTION, to evanescence, to fading away, to > CESSATION ..." [emphases mine] to be fairly clear. On the other hand, if all > that you mean by impermanence not meaning destruction is that there are no > truly independent, self-existing "things" to begin with, and hence none to be > destroyed, I would agree with you. But that is not how you have expressed it. > If you mean something else, then I'm afraid that I just don'tunderstand you. > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hi Howard, I'm not absolutely sure, but I suspect that what Kenneth is trying to express is that not only are cittas not real *things* that can either be created or destroyed, but that they only arise momentarily and seemingly in response to arising conditions, and therefore there is no way for them to *permanently cease*. In other words, if you define Nibbana as that condition under which they do cease, you would have to say definitionally that they then cease. But as I read Kenneth, he is saying that this is only provisionally permanent, because if conditions were to arise again which would promote the arising of cittas, then the cittas would arise again. See what I mean? There is no *thing* called Nibbana which actually guarantees that no cittas will arise again. They will if and only if conditions do arise again which cause they to co-arise. Hope that's not too convoluted, but it leads away from seeing Nibbana as entity, but as merely a recognition of anatta in [your] field of possibilities...... Robert Ep. 9058 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 9:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Re; Horses [Erik] --- "m. nease" wrote: > Hi RobEp, > > I think you're right. And I also think that the > reason some of us have become such hammerheads on the > subject of satipatthaana is that all that other > kusala, no matter how kusala, just leads to more > sa.msaara--satipatthaana does not. That's how I > understand it, anyway... > > mike Interesting Mike. I'm quite up to understanding the fine differences between what arises with regard to plain old sati and satipatthana, but I find your point intriguing. Robert Ep. --------------------------- > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > --- rikpa21@y... wrote: > > > > ...I always come back > > > to this point here, it seems. While we can talk > > about anatta until > > > the cows come home, even particle physicists know > > that nothing has > > > any intrinsic nature. And yet what does that do > > for them in terms of > > > eradicating the source of suffering? Seriously? > > There is much more to > > > the game than just the study of Right View, which, > > as forerunner, may > > > be key, yet it still plays a holistic role with > > all the other path- > > > factors like Right Speech, Right Resolve, Right > > Effort, etc., and > > > these operate at both the conventional and > > supramundane levels. > > > > Erik, > > I don't know if this applies to what you are saying, > > but I would say there's a big > > difference between understanding something as a > > concept and experiencing it. But > > they are related. > > > > I spent some time trying to directly contemplate > > anicca and anatta the other week > > and had a moment when I suddenly realized that what > > I considered 'Robert' was just > > a temporary collection of experiences. I had > > understood this concept for a long > > time, but the realization at that moment was that it > > was not just right but > > *actual*. It was quite a shock. Instead of having > > the reaction I thought I would > > have had, that I would be depressed at the sense of > > temporariness and mortality > > that this revealed, it was exciting and liberating. > > So this to me was a direct > > experience of anicca. Now I can't say what ultimate > > effect it had. But when I > > think back I now have this memory of a direct > > experience of 'anicca' as it > > pertains to my 'self' [just meaning the familiar > > body, thoughts, etc. that I > > associate with 'Robert']. These moments of direct > > insight, whether they are > > 'large' or 'small' have a very different flavour > > from studying and understanding a > > concept. And in that sense they seem to me to be > > akin to the real workings of the > > path. > > > > I've also sometimes gone for years looking at > > concepts and had *no* insights of > > that sudden and direct kind, so I can't say that > > there is any direct relation. > > But I'm sure there is an indirect and cumulative > > relation between Right View and > > the development of Insight. > > > > What do you think? > > > > Best, > > Robert Ep. > 9059 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 9:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Re; Horses [Erik] --- Dan Dalthorp wrote: > Hi Rob E., > > I've also sometimes gone for years looking at concepts and had *no* > insights of > > that sudden and direct kind, so I can't say that there is any direct > relation. > > But I'm sure there is an indirect and cumulative relation between > Right View and > > the development of Insight. > > > > What do you think? > > Bingo. :] Robert Ep. 9060 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 9:51pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Re; Horses [Erik] Inspiring, Erik. Thanks for sharing your background and specific points. Robert Ep. ============= --- rikpa21@y... wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Dan Dalthorp" wrote: > > Hi Rob E., > > > I've also sometimes gone for years looking at concepts and had > *no* > > insights of > > > that sudden and direct kind, so I can't say that there is any > direct > > relation. > > > But I'm sure there is an indirect and cumulative relation between > > Right View and > > > the development of Insight. > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > Bingo. > > Indeed Dan, but with a little illustration from my own limited > experience as a middling practitioner of this path (who's trying hard > to improve) that may or may not be of some benefit. > > I found the most important aspect of study for me several years ago > was "trangye"--studying the Tibetan sage Je Tsongkhapa's various > refutations of the other tenet systems held by some proponents > of various schools over the millennia, such as the Vaibhasika, > Sautrantika, Yogacara, and "lower" Madhyamika. > > This was an in-depth of several flavors of wrong views that did more > for my understanding of what is measnt by Right View than any other > approach I'd come across in my study of thje Dharma. Of course, I > could have never been ready for this without FIRST having practiced > getting rid of my intense aversion to othjer sentient beings through > the practice of tonglen (giving and taking compassion using the > breath as object). All that study of Right View would have made no > difference to me at the point my mind was filled with ill-will toward > sentient beings, as it had been until I was set straight on the > practice of tonglen and had practiced that for many, many months, > until my heart turned from sour and cynical to being somewhat more > open and accommodating. > > When these preparations were there--in terms of having cultivatad a > somewhat kinder, gentler heart--not to mention the sila of having > abandoned driking to the point of heedlessness, THEN (just looking > back on my own mind-state) the study of Right View became the most > important factor in my practice of the Dharma. > > Right View as taught to me by my lama through his presentation of Je > Tsongkhapa's in his "Essence of Eloquence" showed me how to properly > analyze positions (views) like "Mind Only". These etachings showed me > where I'd been going wrong, and how to analyze and refute the view > that "mind" exists as an absolute entity (the view I had been > clinging to--nearly a solipisistic one). > > This study was still, of course, combined with ongoing tonglen > (Tibetann metta-bhavana) with at least one hour a day of anapanasati > meditation EVERY DAY WITHOUT FAIL, until mental and physical > lightness and pliancy and tranquility became well-established, until > even jhana while riding the subway was possible, and there was real > viriya combined with real passadhi and upekkha at most times, and > even greater piti in jhana meditation than normal throughout the day > (not to mention I dropped about two hours of sleep a night because a > few minutes in the rapture of jhana is like an hour or more of > sleep). Mind you thhis is not even any kind of mastery of jhana, > but "good enough" for a beginner, and good enough that within a few > moments of sitting down, bodily fabrications were calmed and > concentration firmly established, and within moments after that > the "circulating fountain of bliss" arose, and then shortly > thereafter, just calm, unshakeable concentration, taking emptiness of > the "I, me, mine" as the object of meditation stepping in & out of > the jhanas. In other words, a full combination of samatha and > vipashayana, as taught in my system (which is based on Master > Kamalasila's "Bhavana Krama" or the "Progressive Stages" [of > meditation]). > > This practice was ALSO combined also with serious confidence in my > ability to "get" Right View: strong faith (saddha) in the Buddha's > teachings, as well as in my lama's understanding and that he was > teaching Right View. My confidence grew after being shown, via > reasoning and logic, how nothing has independent existence, that > nothing exists absolutely (unestablished apart from conditions), that > all things are composed of other things and therefore subject to > cessation. Nagarjuna's "Verses from the Middle Way" were (and are) of > immense help in this, I must say. > > Every waking moment of my life was centered on the Dharma in some way > at this time, every contemplation a meditation on how things lack > self-nature yet still exist by way of convention, and NEVER the > discarding of conventions like accumulating wholsome kamma either-- > working diligently on practices like tonglen, since my lama taught us > that merit and wisdom are like "two wings on a bird" that work in > tandem to bring to fruition the realization that destroys how we > incorrectly hold to objects as being self-existent, and the direct > realization of emptiness or anatta is the ultimate (and only) > antidote to the sufferings of samsara. > > So not just the study of Right View, but many, many things that all > come together at the same time, which for thse khandas involved at > least two hours a day of the textual study of the Dhamma in addition > to every moment I could recall practices like tonglen and the > meditation on emptiness, along with jhana practice daily for at least > an hour (preceded by mantra recitations--an excellent form of samatha > meditation, BTW, not to mention great metta-bhavana cultivation > with "OM MANI PEMA HUNG" and the like), until the aforementioned > factors were all energized to the point they all came together in a > flash of a single moment that changed everything. > > So while I agree with you that Right View IS forerunner, and I'd > never deny that, and the study of Right View is key. AND YET, without > the more mundane practices it would have been for me a worthless > theoretical exercise by itself. That is a danger of clinging to > the view of anatta often spoken of (Nagarjuna called those who take > anatta/e,ptiness as a view as "incurable" for example)--that it > becomes a VIEW in itself, that it becomes so important it makes > things like cultivating a good heart seem like a pointless endeavor. > > The reason I spend so much time on this point here is that I really > believe that the Middle Way propounded by the Buddha means just that: > it's about finding the right balance, striking the "sweet spot"--like > the lute-string: not too tight, nor too loose. And it is very easy to > become too tight on the study of anatta to the exclusion of > accumulating merit (or too loose), or too tight on the practice of > accumulating merit to the exclusion of the study of Right View (or > too loose). > > The Path is the Middle Way between these extremes. When there is too > much emphasis on either Right View OR the accumulation of merit and > wholesome states of mind (which by themselves we all know don't lead > to anything other than pleasant results--they MUST be combined with > Right View to actualize the Buddha's path), then practice becomes > lopsided and yields no fruit, and one will never find the Middle Way > between the extremes of no-existence and true existence. > 9061 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 9:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lisa's question Dear Sarah, Thanks for your comments on this post. On re-reading it, it reveals a much firmer beginner's understanding of anatta and anicca than I ever had before joining this list. Thanks to all of you for your clarity. Robert Ep. ================================= --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Rob Ep and Lisa, > > Rob Ep wrote this post (below) recently and I thought it was beautifully > written with a good explanation as to why some people like himself 'have been > attracted to this list'.... I might quibble over a few minor points, but I > thought the 'gist' was spot on and very sincere. > > Lisa, as I was clearing out old posts, I thought of your question and wondered > if you might find it helpful. I know Rob Ep will be delighted if you wish to > pursue any of his comments further..... > > Thanks Rob....;-) > > Sarah > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Kenneth, > > I think the answer for most on this list is that the deepest nature of both > > beings > > and phenomena are anatta and anicca. I have not been used to looking at > > anatta as > > a 'nature' or essence, since it is a negation and thus doesn't indicate > > anything > > to me. > > > > But that is exactly, I think, the point of the pure Theravadins on this list: > > > > that anatta being the deepest nature of everything, there is absolutely > > nothing to > > hang onto about oneself or any effect that is caused or any arising > > phenomena. > > They are all absolutely freely arisen with no causal factor other than the > > factors > > that have arisen and vanished in the arising conditions immediately prior, > > and > > previous material or influences which that immediately arising and ceasing > > condition has carried with it and passed to the next arising set of > > co-arising > > conditions. > > > > Anicca is the complementary component to anatta, because if something has no > > central entity, it also has nothing that can outlast the moment. So > > impermanence > > and non-entity work together to insure that there is nothing to identify as a > > real > > self, and nothing to hold onto in the shifting stream of time and shifting > > conditions and effects. There is nothing to do but sit back and become more > > discerning of what is happening. There is no action to take which is not > > ordained > > by some other action. > > > > I think this is a very deep and comprehensible philosophy, with a little > > effort. > > But it is very difficult to take. I think this philosophy is even a good > > medicine > > for those like myself who believe that there is something else involved in > > the > > process. Why? Because it erases or reveals the slightest clinging to a > > notion of > > self. Even if there were that primordial consciousness at the end of the > > rainbow > > which I feel is there, any notion I may have of it or cling to is in fact not > > 'it', because it is also, whatever it is, necessarily beyond clinging to self > > or > > possession. The surest medicine for everyone, Theravadin or Mahayanist, is > > to > > know that every notion we have of self or dhamma or Nibbana, is false, and is > > just > > grist for the mill of discernment. Whatever is at the end of the journey, > > this is > > still the medicine that erases and reveals all clingings. > > > > I think that is why some of us that tend towards Mahayana have been attracted > > to > > this list and its understandings. We who tend to be idealist need a good > > dose of > > anatta to reveal our subtle clingings to self, and there is no real > > substitute for > > this. It is a rigorous and demanding process, to eradicate the notion of > > something there to hold onto or to 'salvage' from the enlightenment process. > > > > > > We will all agree, I think, that even our most precious notions will have to > > be > > washed out in the trickle and eventual flood of discernment. > > > > Regards, > > Robert > > > > =========================== 9062 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 10:02pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Pali Canon on Web thanks, Sarah. Hmn..... this is a good time to thank Sukin for sending me several nice books on Abhidhamma which I have just received in the mail! There's nothing like getting 'hard copy dhamma' from my friends here on the web! Thanks, Sukin! And thanks to Kom again who sent me two nice books on Abhidhamma previously. I can say with some pride that I have read a little and promise to keep reading. These are really lovely gifts! Sarah, I will go to the sites and see what I can find. If I get a bit more reading done in the next few months, maybe I will give myself permission to purchase some of Bikkhu Bodhi's translations. A gift to myself...but not until I'm a bit more deserving. As for the commentaries....hmnn.....that is really a shame that most are not even translated, now that I am finally curious about them. Um, Gayan.........If you're not busy........... Best, Robert Ep. =================================== --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Rob Ep, > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > Is there a complete copy of the Pali Canon translated into English on the > > web? I > > have downloaded one in Pali, but I'm afraid I can only enjoy it for the pure > > poetry of the sound. > > I know the feeling:-) > > Some of the Abhidhamma and many of the commentaries are not translated into > English at all. Out of those parts which have been translated into English, I'm > always very out-of-date as to what is available on the web exactly. Perhaps > Mike or Christine can give this info more precisely with links as I know they > are always up-to-date and link-friendly;-) ... > > If you go to bookmarks on the dsg homepage, you'll find links to the Access to > Insight and Metta sites that have most the Suttas in English, but precious > little Abhidhamma. I forget if the Vinaya is there. > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/links > > Another problem (for some of us) is the quality of the translations which are > rather variable. It's really wonderful to have all the Access to Insight > translations on the Web and to be able to give easy links, but generally I > prefer to read other translations, such as those by B.Bodhi with Commentary > notes where possible, which are mostly only in book form. None of the PTS > translations are on Web either (as far as I know), but all of this is just a > mater of time I'm sure. It is a dilemma for small publishers who would like the > materials to be accessible but yet cannot continue to do their work without any > income. > > Sorry, I'm not really the right person to ask, so I hope someone else will help > with better information. > > Sarah > > 9063 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 10:54pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi Ken O, --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > k: Sarah its ok even if you disagree with me. Its all a mind game :). > I think its time to let go of talking abt Nibbana bc in the end that is > not the focus of our practise. Personnally I feel this will end up not > going anywhere and I apologise for making you spending so much of your > time responding to my post. I hope you are not offended if you kindly let > me have the privilege to end this discussion on Nibbana. Nothing at all to apologise for and why would I feel offended at being given an unexpected holiday Ken;-) ?? Joking aside, thanks for the discussion and all your comments. Please feel free to discuss whatever you like (related to the Dhamma of course ;-) whenever you like.. Sarah 9064 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 11:06pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1- Manji Hi Manji, --- manji wrote: > Hi, > > I am deshi living in a dojo in Washington, DC. Sorry to show my ignorance, but would you tell me what deshi and a dojo are? Rob Ep also lives in Wash DC....thanks in advance. I am so happy to find a > dhamma discussion group, so I joined. Anyways, I learn from daily life and > meditation. I have been reading suttra, abhidhamma and vinaya for about 5 > years. This path was started along time ago, however I am thinking that > maybe the bell sounded greatest when a quote appeared on the back of a book > I walked by in the bookstore when i was very young. > > Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise, > seek what they sought. - Basho I like tthese lines too and you must have been a smart kid to appreciate them;-) > After some time being learning about cetasika in a quite direct fashion I am > right now understanding why aversion is akusala. It is akusala for what it > is, not for what it is about or around. I spent much time after the military > service "beating" myself up mentally over living the way I wanted to live, > in the military I thought of completing military service and becomming a > monk. I thought I had aversion to work and going to college and > universities, but really it was a conditioned aversion to living a monk's > life and attachment to living a monk's life. Doubt... maybe we all know > this... so using that opportunity to listen to the dhamma of doubt, the > dhamma of aversion... the dhamma of... the dhamma of... > > So now I am here, practicing and studying, after realizing that it is noble > to live this way. So maybe others realize this too. Experiencing > nama-rupa... I am very fortunate to experience and grow up these ways, and > realizing that living a human existence allows all the chimes of dhamma to > ring. > > We are very fortunate, so use every opportunity to listen to the dhamma. > Nice to meet you Sarah :) Manji, I found all of this to be interesting and intriguing....and am very glad you've found us...Like you say, we're fortunate to be able to listen to the dhamma in this life. Look forward to hearing plenty more from you and hope the 'chimes of dhamma' keep ringing;-) Sarah p.s. You asked this question: "Nibbana is a dhamma, what does it uphold?".....I'm not sure I can answer this or I could say it upholds anything...what do you think? 9065 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 11:26pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II & welcome Dear Yulia, --- Yulia Klimov wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > Thank you very much for your welcome letter! > This group was recommended to me by one of your members, Robert. And I am > very glad he did! All of us too... > I have to say I understand a little from postings here, because I am very > new to Buddhism. > I forgot to say, I've read a book on line by Nina Van Gorkom and was moved > by it. Was there anything in particular that 'moved' you or struck a chord? > I am a very first grader now and take off my hat for you, graduates :). I think we'd mostly rather put ourselves with the 1st graders than the graduates..:) > I live in Florida, originally from Russia. I have a language ability, that's > why I asked about Pali. I am little bit disagree with people here who said, > language doesn't matter. Actually I think this is a big advantage in that for many people, if they read or hear a few pali words it's a condition for dosa (aversion) and this can be an obstacle to considering more. >It's not what language matters, translator will > always brings his (her) feelings, vision to the subject. If you read > Shakspiere in old English and read it in Russian translation, it leaves you > wonder, if that was the same autor :). This is a good point and why some people prefer to only read Pali. > Thank you for all your postings here, I really enjoy atmosphere here (does > it sound like attachement to you :)?). Well, I think it's natural to have attachment (and fun) too ;) Hopefully in between the many moments of attachment there is a little sati (mindfulness) and some wise reflection too. Hope to hear more from you, Yulia and just 'shout' if you wish anyone to explain what they've written... Sarah 9066 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 11:39pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: online Canon/Roberrt E. Folks, By the way, ACCESS TO INSIGHT has a largish collection of transcribed lectures by B. Bodhi, A. Brahmavamso, and other notable teachers, available for reading or cutting and pasting. For instance, there is an eighty-page lecture by B.Bodhi on the Noble Eightfold Path. More homework for me. Here is the exact site: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/waytoend.html ================= --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Christine Forsyth" > wrote: > > > > . > > I would really like to know more of the Commentaries, my interest > has > > been piqued by members of this list. > > > > Could anyone assist by listing what would be good to buy, where to > > buy and what to start with? > > > > metta, > > Christine > > > >___________ > Dear Christine, > I recommend : > Net of views Bhikkhu Bodhi BPS > The Root of existence Bhikkhu Bodhi BPS > The Discourse on the fruits of recluseship Bhikkhu Bodhi BPS > The Dispeller of Delusion (2volume set) Pali Text society > The Expositor, Pali text society > The Dhammapada (commentary) by John Ross Carter and Palihawadana > Buddhist legends (3vol.set) Burlingame > Jataka (3vol.set) Cowell PTS > the udana commentary (masefield) PTS > Vimana stories (masefield) PTS > > You could start at the top and work down. I also recommend ANY books > by Nina van Gorkom http://www.zolag.co.uk > (she always quotes suttas and commentaries) > > > robert 9067 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 11:42pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Pali Canon on Web thanks, Mike. Where's a good place to order some of the commentaries in hard cover. Perhaps used?? Robert Ep. ============== --- "m. nease" wrote: > Hi Sarah and Rob, > > Sorry to disappoint but I'm not up on abhidhamma on > the web either (especially commentaries). The best I > can offer are the files and links at > http://abhidhamma.org/ > and http://www.dhammastudy.com/ > > I agree with Sarah about Bhikkhu Bodhi's translations, > some of which you can find on the web searching by his > name, but unfortunately few. > > mike > > --- Sarah wrote: > > Dear Rob Ep, > > > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > Dear Sarah, > > > Is there a complete copy of the Pali Canon > > translated into English on the > > > web? I > > > have downloaded one in Pali, but I'm afraid I can > > only enjoy it for the pure > > > poetry of the sound. > > > > I know the feeling:-) > > > > Some of the Abhidhamma and many of the commentaries > > are not translated into > > English at all. Out of those parts which have been > > translated into English, I'm > > always very out-of-date as to what is available on > > the web exactly. Perhaps > > Mike or Christine can give this info more precisely > > with links as I know they > > are always up-to-date and link-friendly;-) ... > > > > If you go to bookmarks on the dsg homepage, you'll > > find links to the Access to > > Insight and Metta sites that have most the Suttas in > > English, but precious > > little Abhidhamma. I forget if the Vinaya is there. > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/links > > > > Another problem (for some of us) is the quality of > > the translations which are > > rather variable. It's really wonderful to have all > > the Access to Insight > > translations on the Web and to be able to give easy > > links, but generally I > > prefer to read other translations, such as those by > > B.Bodhi with Commentary > > notes where possible, which are mostly only in book > > form. None of the PTS > > translations are on Web either (as far as I know), > > but all of this is just a > > mater of time I'm sure. It is a dilemma for small > > publishers who would like the > > materials to be accessible but yet cannot continue > > to do their work without any > > income. > > > > Sorry, I'm not really the right person to ask, so I > > hope someone else will help > > with better information. > > > > Sarah > > > > 9068 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 1, 2001 11:49pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Pali Canon on Web Here's another good section of the Access to Insight site, with large portions of the Pali Canon and essays by important teachers available for direct downloading. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/index.html Robert Ep. ================= > --- "m. nease" wrote: > > Hi Sarah and Rob, > > > > Sorry to disappoint but I'm not up on abhidhamma on > > the web either (especially commentaries). The best I > > can offer are the files and links at > > http://abhidhamma.org/ > > and http://www.dhammastudy.com/ > > > > I agree with Sarah about Bhikkhu Bodhi's translations, > > some of which you can find on the web searching by his > > name, but unfortunately few. > > > > mike > > > > --- Sarah wrote: > > > Dear Rob Ep, > > > > > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > Dear Sarah, > > > > Is there a complete copy of the Pali Canon > > > translated into English on the > > > > web? I > > > > have downloaded one in Pali, but I'm afraid I can > > > only enjoy it for the pure > > > > poetry of the sound. > > > > > > I know the feeling:-) > > > > > > Some of the Abhidhamma and many of the commentaries > > > are not translated into > > > English at all. Out of those parts which have been > > > translated into English, I'm > > > always very out-of-date as to what is available on > > > the web exactly. Perhaps > > > Mike or Christine can give this info more precisely > > > with links as I know they > > > are always up-to-date and link-friendly;-) ... > > > > > > If you go to bookmarks on the dsg homepage, you'll > > > find links to the Access to > > > Insight and Metta sites that have most the Suttas in > > > English, but precious > > > little Abhidhamma. I forget if the Vinaya is there. > > > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/links > > > > > > Another problem (for some of us) is the quality of > > > the translations which are > > > rather variable. It's really wonderful to have all > > > the Access to Insight > > > translations on the Web and to be able to give easy > > > links, but generally I > > > prefer to read other translations, such as those by > > > B.Bodhi with Commentary > > > notes where possible, which are mostly only in book > > > form. None of the PTS > > > translations are on Web either (as far as I know), > > > but all of this is just a > > > mater of time I'm sure. It is a dilemma for small > > > publishers who would like the > > > materials to be accessible but yet cannot continue > > > to do their work without any > > > income. > > > > > > Sorry, I'm not really the right person to ask, so I > > > hope someone else will help > > > with better information. > > > > > > Sarah > > > 9069 From: Sarah Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 0:09am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1-Howard Hi Howard, sorry for the delay... --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > > S: There’s been a lot of discussion on this issue (see ‘useful > posts’ > > > under nibbana perhaps...) Many people here find it very difficult to > > accept that the unconditioned (Nibbana) is experienced by the conditioned > > (lokuttara cittas), but that’s how it is in the Pali canon as indicated > in > > my previous quote. > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Just a request for clarification: Found in which pitakas? And if it is > > found in the suttas, is it clear there that nibbana is intended to be a > positively existing separate dhamma being observed by cittas, or is > "observing nibbana" more along the lines of the mind getting a glimpse of > what it is like to have ignorance dispelled, a glimpse of the way things > really are when seen truly? > ------------------------------------------------------ Howard, I thought this was pretty clear in the earlier Udana Com notes accompanying the sutta (ie Nibbana as unconditioned, experienced by the conditioned)... I'm not quite sure where the problem is. I thought these passages made it clear that nibbana is the unconditioned 'base' or arammana for the conditioned cittas to experience and indeed is itself a condition in this way. I think they also make it clear tha nibbana is an 'existing separate dhamma'....No? I think that whenever there are moments of right understanding of realities, 'things' are 'seen truly'. So there has to be a lot of accumulated wisdom and to the very highest degree, seeing things (ie conditioned realities) truly, BEFORE the unconditioned reality is realised or experienced. After the final remnants of ignorance have been eradicated totally, there must continue to be plenty of cittas with right understanding, seeing conditioned realities as they are and the eradicated defilements are 'reviewed'. In between, of course, there must be many moments of seeing, hearing and other vipaka cittas (as now) which are not accompanied by wisdom. My point is that even for the arahat, wisdom doesn't last for more than an 'instant'. I really don't find it helpful to separate the suttas, the abhidhamma or these ancient commentaries. I think we need to consider them all and use whatever assistance they give us to help us understand what we're reading. Without a little understanding of the abhidhamma or the commentary notes, we're bound to read certain suttas, like the one which I've been discussing, with another interpretation. I think all your other points were addressed to Ken O (and I'm not looking for extra trouble today;-) Howard, I have a (strong) feeling that my answer just given is not going to pass your rigorous test....so I look forward to hearing back from you. 2 qus from other posts of yours: 1) what is a 'modicom of sila'?? 2) What happens when those bicycle pedals stop going round.....(by conditions they will stop in time, no?) Sarah p.s I've appreciate a couple of your replies to Herman's questions btw..... 9070 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 1:56am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Tales from India - Nimitta & anubyanjana Sarah --- Sarah wrote: > > This is written from my office on Monday morning, which seems another > > world altogether from the sights, sounds and smells of just 24 hours > ago, > > but in the absolute sense is, as we know in theory at least, different > > only in terms of the shape-and-form and detail (nimitta and > anupayancanna > > -- sometimes translated as 'outward appearance and particulars') > appearing > > through those doorways. The actual experiencing of objects through > the > > various doorways remains the same in its essential nature throughout, > and > > it is this essential nature that is the object of the understanding > that > > we are urged to develop. > > Would you kindly elaborate on the nimitta and anupayancanna as mentioned > above > and the distinction between them in this context. I would be very happy to, but I’m afraid I don’t know much about this area, except that it’s an important aspect of both sila and satipatthana. As I understand it, when impressions are received through the sense-doors there will inevitably be paying attention with kilesa to the ‘sign’ (shape-and-form/nimitta) and ‘particulars’ (details/anubya~njana) of those sense-impressions. It seems to mean the absence of the guarding of the sense-doors. I don’t know any more than this. Further study required, for sure. I am hoping Nina will have something to say about it in her writings on the trip, since it came up for discussion and Nalanda and again at Patna. In the meantime, here are some references to get started with— Nyanatiloka’s ‘Buddhist Dictionary’: ‘Nimitta’ is defined as ‘mark, sign; image; target, object; cause, condition’, with the comment that ‘These meanings are used in, and adapted to, many contexts’. Several doctrinal usages are discussed, of which #3 is— <<'Outward appearance': of one who has sense-control it is said- that "he does not seize upon the general appearance” of an object (na nimittaggáhí; M. 38, D. 2; …).>> There is further discussion under the 4 kinds of morality consisting of purification (catupárisuddhi-síla), as follows: <<(2) Restraint of the senses (indriya-samvara-síla). "Whenever the monk perceives a form with the eye, a sound with the ear, an odour with the nose, a taste with the tongue, an impression with the body, an object with the mind, *he neither adheres to the appearance [J: nimitta?] as a whole, nor to its parts [J: anubyancana?]*. And he strives to ward off that through which evil and unwholesome things, greed and sorrow, would arise, if he remained with unguarded senses; and he watches over his senses, restrains his senses" (M 38).>> Visudhimagga I, 42, 54 At I, 42, a discussion of ‘Virtue as restraint of sense faculties’: <<‘On seeing a visible object with the eye, he apprehends *neither the signs nor the particulars* through which, if he left the eye faculty unguarded, evil and unprofitable states of covetousness and grief might invade him, he enters upon the way of its restraint, he guards the eye faculty, he undertakes the restraint of the eye faculty. … [and so on for the other sense doors] …’ (M.i, 180) [This] is virtue of restraint of the sense faculties.>> At I, 54, an explanation of the 2 terms: <<”Apprehends neither the signs”: he does not apprehend the sign of woman or man, or any sign that is a basis for defilement such as the sign of beauty, etc.: he stops at what is merely seen. “Nor the particulars”: he does not apprehend any aspect classed as hand, foot , smile, laughter, talk, looking ahead, looking aside, etc., which has acquired the name ‘particular (anubya~njana)’ because of its particularising ( anu anu bya~njanato) defilements, because of its making them manifest themselves. He only apprehends what is really there.>> Hope this is helpful. Jon 9071 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 3:01am Subject: Seeing Realities - beginners class Dear All, I have asked this question on DL and have taken Robert's advice to ask it here as well. I have been reading 'Understanding Reality' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.zolag.co.uk/realf.pdf She teaches that the Ariyan Disciple sees things as they really are and is not enslaved to the worldly conditions...... 'Seeing realities" - how do you *practice* such a thing? If one wishes to learn meditation using the breath as object, there are lots of articles, books, workshops and retreats. Many successful methods exist for sitting, walking, lying or standing meditation. In any group, there will people who have at least an elementary understanding of meditation and are able to discuss it. I have not found this is so with 'seeing realities'. Meditation on the breath is now "mainstream" - 'seeing realities' is considered by most everyday ordinary people as 'a little unusual', even many 'stylised' meditation practitioners. How do you practice "seeing realities"? I look at a person, a car or a tree - and it is already a person or a car or a tree in my mind. In my perception it is already labelled. And the same with feelings....I already feel happy, sad, ill, or excited. They are defined immediately I am aware of them. Are there step-by-step instructions, a method, for learning this skill of 'seeing things as they really are'? For instance, is it like 'walking meditation' ? Is 'naming' used. The way I was initially taught this with regard to walking meditation was to start of with the large movements 'step, step' , then gradually the step is dissected into smaller and smaller named parts, with intentions inserted where noticed as well. When concentration is established and strong, the labels and segmenting are dropped and smooth awareness of the whole movement is maintained. I would be grateful for any basic, simple replies (if that is possible). metta, Christine 9072 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 4:13am Subject: Re: Hello...[Robert E] Hi Robert E., It's tough to argue with most of your comments, but I don't think that Robert K is espousing the view that you are attributing to him. Comments interspersed... Rob E: > I find the description of everything that seems positive in life as really being a > hidden negative to be a rather critical view, rather than merely a discerning > view. Is our joy at a moment of love really just conceit and attachment? Is the > feeling of real confidence just conceit, and a moment of peace really a clinging > to quiet? Moments of real love (metta? karuna? mudita? adosa?) must be free of conceit and attachment. But are moments that we might feel joy at what we term "love" really free of conceit and attachment? Or is there attachment, lust, craving, pity? Discernment of the difference between attachment and non-attachment is critical, and in this ignorant confluence of 5 aggregates, attachment is much, MUCH more common. >I don't agree with this. I think the really free moments in life which > appear unimpeded and functionally unobstructed are real, and that it is the > accompanying insecurities, fears and clingings, which are not really that hard to > identify -- they always have a nasty feeling somewhere in their occurence -- to be > the defilements that interfere with the unimpeded flow of momentary experiences. It is true that dosa is associated with nasty feeling somewhere, but consciousness rooted in lobha (craving) can be pleasant or neutral. Dosa is easier to recognize, it is unpleasant, and it can have such sharp negative external consequences that are obvious; but lobha (craving, clinging, lust, attachment) is more difficult to recognize, may be pleasant, may not always have sharp external consequences. Development is much more difficult than trying to avoid the things with nasty feeling evident (dosa) and pursuing the things without nasty feeling evident (both lobha and kusala). This may be why Buddha said "Greed is a lesser fault and fades away slowly; hatred is a great fault and fades away quickly..." (AN 3:68) > If we imagine an Arahat's experience after Nibbana and before Parinibbana to be > one in which each moment in life is clearly discerned and dealt with without > hesitation, confusion or remorse, I would say we all have moments like this, only > they are few and far between, and the growing of awareness and lessening of > attachment increases the occurence of these kusala cittas. Right. > To see all of our 'good' feelings as attachments and delusions All? To see all 'good' (pleasant?) feelings as attachment and delusion would indeed be a grave mistake. But to fail to realize how frequently what we think is 'good' (pleasant) is really 'bad' (attachment, delusion) is also a grave mistake. > sense. I don't > look at life this way. I see it as inherently illusory but neither good nor bad. > Attachment and clinging cause suffering, they are also neither 'good' nor 'bad'. Attachment and clinging cause suffering and are called 'akusala'. Non- attachment (with wisdom) leads away from suffering and so is called 'kusala'. > Why not accept and enjoy the moments in life that are not experienced as > suffering, and deal with the sufferings and defilements when they arise? I don't think anyone here is saying "don't accept and enjoy" moments that are not filled with dosa. But it is critical to recognize lobha as lobha. 9073 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 4:24am Subject: Re: Tipitaka and commentaries Dear Robert, As per usual there is rigour and thoroughness in your posts. I feel uneasy about the next question, but I do not think that not asking it will be a better option. What then, in the scheme of things, is the place of the writings of Khun Sujin ( I have no idea what Khun means, by the way, I am merely repeating what I have seen ) and Nina van Gorkom (Gorinchem is a beautiful walled town in Gelderland, just up the dike from where I spent my childhood). Thank you Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- > Dear Herman, > This web site lists the Tipitaka and all commentaries and tikas that > were recited at the last Buddhist council > http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/archive.htm > The commentaries are: > ..>>>ATTHAKATHAS > The Pali Tipitaka Atthakathas as approved by the Sixth > Buddhist Council (Chattha Sangayana) are as follows, the size of each > book is the same as that of the Pali Canon Books > > Commentaries (Atthakathas) (51 Volumes). > 1. Digha Nikaya (Silakkhandha vagga) Atthakatha. (pp. 338). > 2. Digha Nikaya Mahavagga Atthakatha (pp. 403). > 3. Digha Nikaya Pathikavagga Atthakatha (pp. 251). > 4. Mulapannasa AtthakathaVol. I (pp. 398) > 5. Mulapannasa AtthakathaVol. II (pp. 320) > 6. Mulapannasa AtthakathaVol. III (pp. 309). > 6. Majjhimapannasa Atthakatha (pp. 309) > 7. Upari-pannasa Atthakatha (pp. 254). > 8. Sagathavagga (Samyutta) Atthakatha (pp. 325). > 9. Nidanavagga and Khandha (Samyutta) Atthakatha (pp. 324). > 10. Salayatanavagga & Mahavagga (Samyutta) Atthakatha (pp. 341). > 11. Anguttara AtthakathaVol. I. (pp. 416). > 12. Anguttara Atthakatha Vol. II (pp. 397) > 13. Anguttara Atthakatha Vol. III (pp. pp. 357 > 14. Parajikakanda Atthakatha Vol. I. (pp. 346). > 15. Parajikakanda Atthakatha Vol. II. (pp. 312). > 16. Pacityadi Atthakatha (pp. 437). > 17. Culavaggadi Atthakatha (pp. 265). > 18. Kankhavitarani Atthakatha(pp. 357). > 19. Vinaya Sangaha Atthakatha(pp. 468). > 20. Atthasalini Atthakatha (pp. 454) > 21. Sammoha Vinodani Atthakatha (pp. 508). > 22. Panca pakarana Atthakatha (pp. 499). > 23. Khuddakapatha Atthakatha (pp. 216). > 24. Dhammapada AtthakathaVol. I. (pp. 447). > 25. Dhammapada Atthakatha. > 26. Udana Atthakatha(pp. 393). > 27. Itivuttaka Atthakatha (pp. 355) > 28. Suttanipata Atthakatha Vol. I. (pp. 314) > 29. Suttanipata AtthakathaVol. II. (pp. 324) > 30. Vimanavatthu Atthakatha (pp. 335) > 31. Petavatthu (pp. 270) > 32. Patisambhidamagga Atthakatha Vol. I. (pp. 345). > 33. Patisambhidamagga Atthakatha Vol. II. (pp. 323). > 34. Visuddhimagga AtthakathaVol. I. (pp. 370). > 35. Visuddhimagga AtthakathaVol. II. (pp. 353). > 36. Thera Gatha AtthakathaVol. I. (pp. 485). > 37. Thera Gatha Atthakatha Vol. II. (pp. 546). > 38. Theri Gatha Atthakatha(pp. 305). > 39. Apadana AtthakathaVol. I. (pp. 403). > 40. Apadana AtthakathaVol. II. (pp. 303) > 41. Jataka AtthakathaVol. I. (pp. 538). > 42. Jataka AtthakathaVol. II. (pp. 408). > 43. Jataka AtthakathaVol. III. (pp. 517). > 44. Jataka AtthakathaVol. IV. (pp. 504) > 45. Jataka AtthakathaVol. V. (pp. 553). > 46. Jataka Atthakatha Vol. VI. (pp. 332). > 47. Jataka Atthakatha Vol.VII. (pp. 387). > 48. Cula Niddesa and Netti Atthakatha (pp. 276). > 49. Maha Niddesa Atthakatha (pp. 419). > 50. Buddhavamsa Atthakatha (pp. 354), > 51. Cariya Pitaka Atthakatha (pp. 328) > TIKAS > The Pali Tipitaka Tikas as approved by the Sixth Buddhist > Council (Chattha Sangayana) are as follows; the size of each book is > the same as that of the Pali Canon Books:— > > Sub-Commentaries (Tikas)(26-Volumes). > 1. Silakkhandhavagga Abhinava Tika Vol. I. (pp. 500). > 2. Silakkhandhavagga Abhinava Tika Vol. II. (pp. 437). > 3. Silakkhanahavagga Mula Tika (pp. 405). > 4. Mahavagga Tika (pp. 358). > 5. Pathikavagga Tika (pp. 292). > 6. Mulapannasa Tika Vol. I. (pp. 394). > 7. Mulapannasa Tika Vol. II. (pp. 324). > 8. Majjhima & Uparipannasa Tika (pp. 442). > 9.Samyutta Tika Vol. I (pp. 345) > 10. Samyutta TikaVol. II. (pp. 551). > 11. Anguttara TikaVol. I (pp. 288). > 12. Anguttara Tika Vol. II. (pp. 396). > 13. Anguttara Tika Vol. III.(pp. 371). > 14. Sarattha Dipani TikaVol . I (pp. 460). > 15. Sarattha Dipani TikaVol. II. (pp. 448). > 16. Sarattha Dipani TikaVol. III. (pp. 496). > 17. Vimativinodani TikaVol. I. (pp. 362). > 18. Vimativinodani TikaVol. II. (pp. 322) > 19.Vajirabuddhi Tika (pp. 585) > 20. Dhammasangani Mula Tika (pp. 220) > 21. Vibhanga Mula Tikaand (pp. 229) > 22. Pancapakarana Mula Tika and Anutika(pp. 323). > 23. Visuddhimagga Maha Tika Vol. I. (pp. 46l). > 24. Visuddhimagga Maha Tika Vol. II. (pp. 533). > 25. Netti Tika and Netti Vibhavini Tika (pp. 356). > 26. Kankhavitarani Purana and Abhinava Tika > > Only a handful of these have been translated into English to my great > regret. > The guidelines to Dhammastudygroup says: > Agreement > > By subscribing to DhammaStudyGroup, you agree to follow the > guidelines prescribed here. > > Posts > We welcome any questions, answers, or comments, however light- > hearted, relating to the Buddha's teachings as found in the texts of > the Theravada tradition (including the Suttanta, Abhidhamma, Vinaya > and the ancient commentaries). Endquote > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/DSG_Guidelines > > This doesn't mean that there can be no disagreement with any points > in the commentaries or even the Tipitaka. > best wishes > robert > 9074 From: frank kuan Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 7:02am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Realities - beginners class Hi Christine, I just read a great sutta in SN the other day. The Buddha talks about the importance of developing concentration. The deepening of concentration allows us to get a more direct perception of impermanence. When we get a deeper perception of impermanence, then we are seeing deeper into reality. How do we deepen concentration? I think the answer will differ for everyone. The obvious answer is to meditate, but if meditation seems to yield little progress, then the 5 hindrances are acting up and we have to deal with those that are particularly troublesome for me. -fk p.s. the more I see how much the Buddha in the early suttas emphasizes the practical matters of cultivation and "seeing reality", i.e. seeing impermanence of the world, the 3 marks applied to the six sense bases, the 5 aggregates of clinging, the more I doubt the later buddhist scriptures have any validity whatsoever as the authentic word of the Buddha. The styles and material are just SO INCONGRUOUS. Here's a worldly poem on impermanence I ran into recently. Death of the Day (1858) by Walter Savage Landor My pictures blacken in their frames As night comes on, And youthful maids and wrinkled dames Are now all one. Death of the day! a sterner Death Did worse before; The fairest form, the sweetest breath, Away he bore. 9075 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 7:12am Subject: Re: Tipitaka and commentaries Dear Herman, Always a pleasure to talk, and I think this is a question that a few members would be interested in. Nothing anyone at this time, no matter who they are, can ever be considered as atthakatha (commentary). This only applies to the works that Buddhaghosa and Dhammapala did (maybe one other too but I'm not sure). They edited and translated the ancient commentaries that mahinda had brought from India in 2200BC.(Plus added some additional material collected up until their time). The tikas (subcommentaries ) have a tiered system where some are considered better than others. And then there are the even later tikas on the tikas...which are accordingly respected based on their worth. In Thailand Sujin is well-respected among people who like Abhidhamma (a relatively small minority of Buddhists). However, if you meet Sujin you'll probably find she doesn't so often refer to the texts and is most interested in helping people understand the present moment and how to really see that all dhammas are conditioned. In short, to answer your question - some people greatly respect Sujin and Nina now; and the way things work they will probably be more respected and studied after they die, but their words cannot surpass or supercede the ancients. At best it can only support them. best wishes robert p.s khun just means sir or madame in thai. p.s. I know longtime students of Sujin's who don't especially like Abhidhamma, or at least not in large doses, and who would (and have) find this list a little arcane sometimes. They still get the gist of the Buddha's teaching through listening and learning to study the moment and have deeper understanding than some Abhidhamma theorists. (but I think they would go even faster if they studied more details) In dhammastudygroup@y..., hhofman@d... wrote: > Dear Robert, > > As per usual there is rigour and thoroughness in your posts. > > I feel uneasy about the next question, but I do not think that not > asking it will be a better option. > > What then, in the scheme of things, is the place of the writings of > Khun Sujin ( I have no idea what Khun means, by the way, I am merely > repeating what I have seen ) and Nina van Gorkom (Gorinchem is a > beautiful walled town in Gelderland, just up the dike from where I > spent my childhood). > > Thank you > > Herman gg 9076 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 7:12am Subject: Rid of impurities... Make an island unto yourself! Strive hard and become wise! Rid of impurities and cleansed of stain, you shall not come again to birth and decay. Dhammapada 238 Dear friends, The above verses seem the Buddha suggests a lot of controlling. I don't know if they are translated incorrectly from Pali. Please help. Thank you. With Appreciation, Alex Tran 9077 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 2:26am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi, Robert (and Kenneth) - In a message dated 11/2/01 12:39:49 AM Eastern Standard Time, epsteinrob@Y... writes: > Hi Howard, > I'm not absolutely sure, but I suspect that what Kenneth is trying to > express is > that not only are cittas not real *things* that can either be created or > destroyed, but that they only arise momentarily and seemingly in response > to > arising conditions, and therefore there is no way for them to *permanently > cease*. > In other words, if you define Nibbana as that condition under which they do > cease, you would have to say definitionally that they then cease. > --------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: As I understand it, any dhamma arising is a conventional arising, with no real and separate "thing" truly arising at all. But, this side of nibbana, that is not how you or I or Ken or any of us (I believe) see it. Every apparent dhamma which arises subsequently ceases, and it then no longer "exists". For sure the (final) cessation is instantaneous and not a permanent or ongoing event, but, then that dhamma is gone for good. The advent of full enlightenment, however, marks the cessation of all conditions, not in the sense that any real, self-existent and separate things ever cease, but, rather, in the sense that the illusion of there ever *being* such things has been uprooted. The advent of nibbana is a phenimenological and psychological event, not the transformation of some self-existing external world. ------------------------------------------------------- But as I read> > Kenneth, he is saying that this is only provisionally permanent, because if > conditions were to arise again which would promote the arising of cittas, > then the > cittas would arise again. See what I mean? > ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't know. In this triple world of conventional things, when a mind state ceases, though others, conditioned by the first, will subsequently arise, the first one is *gone*. Any sense that the first one, though gone, still somehow continues, is to read into things one of the very kinds of eternalism and essentialism that Nagarjuna, and well before him the Buddha, criticized. The problem with language, of course, is an essential one. When one says that dhammas cease entirely, that is taken to be a form of anniilationism. But that is only due to our misbelieving in the existence, at any time, of separate, self-sufficient dhammas. -------------------------------------------------------- There is no *thing* called Nibbana > which actually guarantees that no > cittas will arise again. They will if and only > if conditions do arise again which cause they to co-arise. --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: This I do not get. Nibbana has nothing to do with the ordinary cessation of "things". Nibbana is the state of cessation in the sense "in nibbana" no separate things are ever seen to actually arise at all, ever. But even in the realm of apparently separate conditions, the samsaric realm of resticted and defiled vision in which we all "live", conditions don't re-arise and don't cause other conditions to re-arise, except when really misperceived. The pain I have in my knee today has many charateristics in common with the pain I had there yesterday, but it is not "the same pain", and the aversive reaction that arises in response today is not the aversive reaction which arose yesterday. Sure we conventionally say "Hey, my knee pain is back", but that is just a manner of speaking, and a manner of speaking shouldn't serve as the basis for some sort of eternalist, essentialist philosophical enterprise. ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > Hope that's not too convoluted, but it leads away from seeing Nibbana as > entity, > but as merely a recognition of anatta in [your] field of > possibilities...... > -------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, I'll say that this characterization of nibbana certainly has an appealing ring to my ears! ;-)) -------------------------------------------------------------- > > Robert Ep. > > ============================= 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) 9078 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 8:07am Subject: Re: Rid of impurities... --- Dear Alex, Nice to hear from you! Remember the Buddha used at times vohara vaca (conventional speech). Sometimes we urge each other to do good deeds , to study , to listen, to consider , to have sati. These words can be a condition and a reminder for awareness. For one person it can be a condition (but never the only condition) for them to be more generous, for another to respect their parents, and for another to understand this moment. ..And yet for another it could be a condition for wrong effort with wrong view... What is the deepest way of making an "Island of oneself'? Well in the Satipatthanasamyutta sutta (p1637-connected discourses) it says : "And how Ananda does a bhikkhu dwell with himself as an island..with no other refuge, dwell with the Dhamma as an island, with the Dhamma as a refuge, with no other refuge. Here Ananda a bhikkhu dwells contemplating the body in the body..feelings in feelings..mind in mind...phenomena in phenomena"enquote. Thus a summary of satipatthana. And what is satipatthana?`Iggleden pxliii (vibhanga intro.) "These states are not me, these are not mine, herein there is no soul, this is transient, clinging to these states is of the nature of suffering'. This as a broad statement is what is meant by the Four Foundations of Mindfulness" endquote. best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., axtran@h... wrote: > Make an island unto yourself! > Strive hard and become wise! > Rid of impurities and cleansed of stain, > you shall not come again to birth and decay. > > Dhammapada 238 > > Dear friends, > > The above verses seem the Buddha suggests a lot of controlling. I > don't know if they are translated incorrectly from Pali. Please help. > > Thank you. > > With Appreciation, > Alex Tran 9079 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 8:42am Subject: Re: Hello...[Robert E] --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., dalthorp@o... wrote: > > > >Robert E: Why not accept and enjoy the moments in life that are not > experienced as > > suffering, and deal with the sufferings and defilements when they > arise? > _________ >DAN: I don't think anyone here is saying "don't accept and enjoy" moments > that are not filled with dosa. But it is critical to recognize lobha > as lobha. ____________ Yes, that's right Dan. Possibly I do sound a bit 'protestant' in some posts - and give the wrong impression. I heard a tape where Alan Weller asked T.A. Sujin about enjoyments etc. in life. She replied that she thought one should follow what one enjoys, but with wisdom. I think Robert E. was getting at this in his post. So what we don't want to do is become serious, uptight, anal retentive prudes; plenty of these around already.;) robert 9080 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 8:43am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Concepts Herman, Let me give you my initial answers to some very interesting questions. The last, first: The idea that suffering occurs to a non-existent being and thus is non-existent itself is an easy conclusion to draw, but in my opinion does not note the reality correctly. Suffering does not occur to the 'concept' 'self' because a concept cannot experience anything. It is rather an object of consciousness. So where is suffering experienced? It is experienced by a citta, by consciousness. Since consciousness actually experiences suffering, suffering is actual. The being that we *think* is suffering is not real, but the suffering and the consciousness that experiences it, are. I hope that distinction makes some sense of what is a very perplexing seeming paradox. My conclusion is that compassion arises from this understanding and that the expression of ultimate compassion is to help the 'cittas' in question to release the causes of suffering. The path leads to release of clinging and aversion which cause suffering, and thus the suffering cittas gradually will cease to arise in more advanced stages. One can also try to help relieve physical suffering in the physical world at the same time without undermining this deeper intention. As for anicca, it is again a citta, or consciousness, that is aware of both the illusion of permanence and the reality of transcence. Without the ability to remember and compare moments in a single citta, which takes as its content the reality of the previous moment, I believe there would be no suffering and be no path. Neither would be possible. It is part of the process of this life, both delusion and awakening, that this is possible. I don't know what life would be or what kind of mindfulness we would be capable of if we could absolutely only be cognisant of the contents of this moment only, without comparing it to another. It is also clear that the ability to see what is in this moment and what is not is part of liberation. Best, Robert Ep. ================== --- hhofman@d... wrote: > Hi all, > > > Anicca (impermanence) is known as one of the three marks of > existence. I assume that anicca is a concept and not a reality to be > directly known. For how can awareness of the present moment include > awareness of the previous moment, and thus know it's own passing? How > can it be a characteristic of a present moment that it is changing? > There must always be reference to a previous ie imagined reality for > the deduction of change to be made. > > Some commentators suggest that anicca is the basis for anatta and > dukkha. Phenomena are unsatisfactory, because all things change all > the time. There is nothing to cling to. Because things change all the > time there is no core essence in any phenomenon and vice versa, > therefore the notion of a self is only a concept. There is nothing to > cling to and noone to do the clinging. > > So who or what suffers? A concept. And what does it suffer from? The > concept of change. And just how real can this suffering be? > > > Regards > > > Herman 9081 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 4:50am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1-Howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 11/2/01 3:12:12 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > Hi Howard, > > sorry for the delay... > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > > > > S: There’s been a lot of discussion on this issue (see ‘useful > > posts’ > > > > under nibbana perhaps...) Many people here find it very difficult to > > > accept that the unconditioned (Nibbana) is experienced by the > conditioned > > > (lokuttara cittas), but that’s how it is in the Pali canon as > indicated > > in > > > my previous quote. > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > > Howard: > > Just a request for clarification: Found in which pitakas? And if > it is > > > > found in the suttas, is it clear there that nibbana is intended to be a > > positively existing separate dhamma being observed by cittas, or is > > "observing nibbana" more along the lines of the mind getting a glimpse of > > > what it is like to have ignorance dispelled, a glimpse of the way things > > really are when seen truly? > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > Howard, I thought this was pretty clear in the earlier Udana Com notes > accompanying the sutta (ie Nibbana as unconditioned, experienced by the > conditioned)... I'm not quite sure where the problem is. --------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't recall anything there about nibbana being experienced by conditioned mind states. Also, when it is said that there is that realm where there is neither earth nor fire etc, that simply describes the functioning of mind freed of defilements, and not an object to be observed. ---------------------------------------------------------------- I thought these> > passages made it clear that nibbana is the unconditioned 'base' or arammana > for > the conditioned cittas to experience and indeed is itself a condition in > this > way. --------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Not at all clear to me. Sorry. -------------------------------------------------------------- I think they also make it clear tha nibbana is an 'existing separate> > dhamma'....No? > > I think that whenever there are moments of right understanding of > realities, > 'things' are 'seen truly'. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, there are moments of relative clarity, even in the midst of samsara. ----------------------------------------------------------------- So there has to be a lot of accumulated wisdom and> > to the very highest degree, seeing things (ie conditioned realities) truly, > BEFORE the unconditioned reality is realised or experienced. After the > final > remnants of ignorance have been eradicated totally, there must continue to > be > plenty of cittas with right understanding, seeing conditioned realities as > they > are and the eradicated defilements are 'reviewed'. > ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: To me, cittas are conventional existents, though, since I am mired with defilement, they don't seem merely conventional - very little of anything does. Nibbana, the state undefiled by the three poisons, is a state to be realized, not to be observed as an object. Who stands where to view such an object?! ---------------------------------------------------------- > > In between, of course, there must be many moments of seeing, hearing and > other > vipaka cittas (as now) which are not accompanied by wisdom. My point is > that > even for the arahat, wisdom doesn't last for more than an 'instant'. > --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Really! So are you saying, then, that there were moments at which the Buddha was without wisdom? ---------------------------------------------------------- > > I really don't find it helpful to separate the suttas, the abhidhamma or > these > ancient commentaries. I think we need to consider them all and use whatever > assistance they give us to help us understand what we're reading. Without a > little understanding of the abhidhamma or the commentary notes, we're bound > to > read certain suttas, like the one which I've been discussing, with another > interpretation. > ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, we differ on this. I consider the suttas as primary. I consider the rest as helpful resources (as I do the Mahayana sutras and commentaries). ------------------------------------------------------ > > I think all your other points were addressed to Ken O (and I'm not looking > for > extra trouble today;-) > > Howard, I have a (strong) feeling that my answer just given is not going to > pass your rigorous test....so I look forward to hearing back from you. > > 2 qus from other posts of yours: > > 1) what is a 'modicom of sila'?? > ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: A minimally adequate amount for getting beyond step zero! How that is to be precisely measured I can't say. ------------------------------------------------------ > 2) What happens when those bicycle pedals stop going round.....(by > conditions > they will stop in time, no?) > ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: I don't know, and it doesn't much matter. Once the gears are released, once there is no longer any grasping, any pushing, any pulling, once there are no longer seen any substantial dhammas to crave or cling to or escape from, and no self to be caught in attachment, nothing more is required, one way or the other. ------------------------------------------------------- > > Sarah > > p.s I've appreciate a couple of your replies to Herman's questions btw..... ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Thanks, Sarah. I'm pleased, particularly because I have no doubt you won't be so much in love with this current post of mine! ;-)) ========================= 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) 9082 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 10:12am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lisa's question Hi Robert Ep and all, Even though we have differences I wholeheartedly agree with Robert Ep that studying Abidhamma, the concept of anatta and anicca is very beautifully explain. Without knowing anatta and anicca, it is difficult to go on the path of cessation of suffering. Without knowing them, it is difficult to learn satipatthana. Without knowing them, it is difficult to understand the meaning of Nibbana (as explain in the Pali Cannon). Without knowing them, it is diffcult to understand there is anatta in anatta. It is through such discussions of Abidhamma, I have benefited greatly. It is also true that without the commentaries of Abidhamma, it is quite difficult to learn Abidhamma. I have a book of Abidhamma by Bikkhu Bodhi, it is diffult to understand unless the commentaries of Abidhamma is there. I hope one day, someone will do the whole translation. I like the way Gayan did it. His translation has an effect like Buddha talking to me directly. Kind regards kenneth Ong --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Sarah, > Thanks for your comments on this post. On re-reading it, it reveals a > much firmer > beginner's understanding of anatta and anicca than I ever had before > joining this > list. > > Thanks to all of you for your clarity. > > Robert Ep. > > ================================= 9083 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 6:08am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello...[Robert E] Hi Lisa and Dan, Dan, I really enjoy reading your mail. Thanks for sharing your insight with us. Lisa, welcome to dsg. My name is Num, I am more a lurker or a reader in dsg. Your question looks simple, but to me it's a very deep and hard question. Esp. what is right and what is wrong? I personally prefer to use wholesome (kusala) or unwholesome (akulasa) to right/wrong. For me to do good deed at times definitely without any wisdom or understanding. I did a lot of thing by my second nature b/c I am used to do it. In Thailand, my parents made me give food to monks on every of my birthday. I think I have done it since my first birthday. I think it's a good thing, but I did it mainly b/c it's sth we always do it. Again on my birthday, I had to serve everybody first, no matter who they were or how old they were. I did not agree with the idea but I always did it. I remember I felt like I just wanted my piece of cake, hey I was the most important person on my birthday. By now, I think I have somewhat more understanding and can see the good reason from my parents points' of view. Without wisdom, we can do a lot of thing, good or bad, on a ritualistic manner. But to me, with wisdom, things become spontaneous and more intuitional base. > > Moments of real love (metta? karuna? mudita? adosa?) must be free of > conceit and attachment. But are moments that we might feel joy at > what we term "love" really free of conceit and attachment? Or is > there attachment, lust, craving, pity? Discernment of the difference > between attachment and non-attachment is critical, and in this > ignorant confluence of 5 aggregates, attachment is much, MUCH more > common. > I remember a debate from my philosophy class in college about how many kinds of love: state, fraternal, erotic, friendship.. At this point I think that actually there is only one kind of love, metta (loving-kindness). Clinging, attachment and anger are not part of love or metta but joy can be both in attachment and metta. The difference between to two is difficult as you said. Things are easily mixing up, kusala moment can cause akusala moment, and rapidly alternating between the two. > It is true that dosa is associated with nasty feeling somewhere, but > consciousness rooted in lobha (craving) can be pleasant or neutral. > Dosa is easier to recognize, it is unpleasant, and it can have such > sharp negative external consequences that are obvious; but lobha > (craving, clinging, lust, attachment) is more difficult to recognize, > may be pleasant, may not always have sharp external consequences. > Development is much more difficult than trying to avoid the things > with nasty feeling evident (dosa) and pursuing the things without > nasty feeling evident (both lobha and kusala). This may be why Buddha > said "Greed is a lesser fault and fades away slowly; hatred is a > great fault and fades away quickly..." (AN 3:68) > > To me both are difficult to recognize esp. the fine one. Again come back to wisdom, lobha as you said can be accompanied by pleasant and neutral feeling. No matter how little the pleasant feeling, lobha can always clings to it. Is it wrong to play tennis?. I don't think so, according to my level of wisdom :) It's fun, good for health but it can be a source of clinging and attachment, pleasant feeling, joy, friendship, feeling good about oneself or even anger when I cannot play the way I want. Usually there are akusala than kusala but kusala moment can occur anytime and anywhere if there are right conditions. > To see all 'good' (pleasant?) feelings as attachment and delusion > would indeed be a grave mistake. But to fail to realize how > frequently what we think is 'good' (pleasant) is really 'bad' > (attachment, delusion) is also a grave mistake. > > Attachment and clinging cause suffering and are called 'akusala'. Non- > attachment (with wisdom) leads away from suffering and so is > called 'kusala'. > > I don't think anyone here is saying "don't accept and enjoy" moments > that are not filled with dosa. But it is critical to recognize lobha > as lobha. > I completely agree. As Robert K's quoted, one can follow what one enjoys, but it's better with wisdom. Akusala can condition later kusala and vice versa. Wisdom does it's own function not us or ourselves. Appreciate Num 9084 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 0:02pm Subject: Re: Rid of impurities... Dear Robert, It's nice to hear from you, too. Thank you for helping me out. With Respect and Appreciation, Alex --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- > > Dear Alex, > Nice to hear from you! > Remember the Buddha used at times vohara vaca (conventional speech). > Sometimes we urge each other to do good deeds , to study , to listen, > to consider , to have sati. These words can be a condition and a > reminder for awareness. > For one person it can be a condition (but never the only condition) > for them to be more generous, for another to respect their parents, > and for another to understand this moment. ..And yet for another it > could be a condition for wrong effort with wrong view... > > What is the deepest way of making an "Island of oneself'? > Well in the > Satipatthanasamyutta sutta (p1637-connected discourses) > it says : "And how Ananda does a bhikkhu dwell with himself > as an island..with no other refuge, dwell with the Dhamma as an > island, with the Dhamma as a refuge, with no other refuge. Here > Ananda a bhikkhu dwells contemplating the body in the > body..feelings in feelings..mind in mind...phenomena in > phenomena"enquote. Thus a summary of satipatthana. > > And what is satipatthana?`Iggleden pxliii (vibhanga intro.) "These > states are not me, these are not mine, herein there is no soul, this > is transient, clinging to these states is of the nature of > suffering'. This as a broad statement is what is meant by the Four > Foundations of Mindfulness" endquote. > best wishes > robert 9085 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 0:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Good material, Jon. Thanks. And this description of the arising, duration and ending of a citta is not so complicated really. Like everything else within the space-time continuum, it has a beginning, a middle and an end, which take place seemingly in time and in the physical world. This makes the citta somewhat accessible as an event, even if it happens too fast and subtly for us to normally be aware of it. Robert Ep. ===================== --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Howard & others > > I have pasted below the entry from Nyanatiloka's 'Buddhist Dictionary' on > the subject of the stages in the life-span of a citta. Hope you find it > of interest. > > Jon > > --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > > Dear Howard and sarah, > > In "A Comprehensive manual of Abhidhamma" Bhikkhu Bodhip156 Guide to > > #6 'The life span of a citta is termed , in the Abhidhamma a > > mindmoment(cittakhana). ..in a flash of lightning billions of mind- > > moments can elasp. Nevertheless, though seemingly infinetesimal each > > mind moment in turn consists of three sub-moments: arising(uppada) > > presence(thithi) and dissolution(bhavanga). Within the breath of a > > mindmoment a citta arises , performs its momentary function, and then > > dissolves, conditioning the next citta in immediate succesion"Endquote > > robert > > Citta-kkhana: 'consciousness-moment', is the time occupied by one single > stage in the perceptual process or cognitive series (cittavíthi). > This moment again is subdivided into the genetic (uppáda), static (thiti) > and dissolving (bhanga) moment. > One such moment is said in the commentaries to be of inconceivably short > duration and to last not longer than the billionth part of the time > occupied by a flash of lightning. > However that may be, we ourselves know from experience that it is possible > within one single second to dream of innumerable things and events. > In Anguttara Nikaya I, 10 it is said: "Nothing, o monks, do I know that > changes so rapidly as consciousness. Scarcely anything may be found that > could be compared with this so rapidly changing consciousness.". > > For a sutta source of the 3 stages, see Anguttara Nikaya III, 47-- > "There are 3 characteristics of what is conditioned (sankhatassa > lakkhaná): an arising (uppádo) is apparent, a passing away (vayo) is > apparent, a change in the existing (thitassa aññathattam: Com. = ageing) > is apparent" > > The same 3 phases are mentioned in Samyutta Nikaya XXII, 37, where they > are applied to each of the 5 khandha. > 9086 From: manji Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 0:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Udana-Nibbana 1 - probably new now. Below... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Epstein" To: Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 12:01 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Udana-Nibbana 1 > I agree Ken. I think the point you have been trying to make lately about > attaching to views is very important, and very hard to get. Since every direction > we think we are taking on the path is in a sense a view, expectation or > anticipation of something not yet experienced, it is almost the same as asking Hmm, "every direction we think..." this right here is part of abhidhamma, the very thing being discussed. Of course it is view, but how about this... The truth is... There is direction. There is path. There is rupa. There is nama. There is suffering. This is different than... My direction, My rupa, My nama, My Suffering... Some say "Life is suffering" but this is not the case, this is not knowing dhamma now. There is suffering, just as there is direction. And in essence... not self, empty. > people to give up 'the path', at least the path in their mind. Very hard. That > is why the zen concept of beginner's mind is very helpful. To keep going back to > understanding that one cannot actually know anything, even the path, except by > direct experiencing of its principles in the moment. > > Robert Ep. The beginner's mind has no concept. No kamma making. It may be just after ;) About knowing... there is knowing, there is wisdom, there is mind. There is sanna. Someone mentioned earlier about importance. This is abhidhamma - right now nama. Right now cetasika... conditioning the sense of "importance". Conditioning a sense of urgency. And what sense is this? It is cetasika. So right now understanding conditioning, and understanding "conditioning of path". It was taught somewhere that "it is like taking a path to get to someplace, you travel toward that place... conditioned. And once you are there there is no travelling, no need for the direction, no more need for the way." It is then you stand in what is unconditioned. Of course, there cannot be this when there is always reaching mind, identifying and reaching. walk softly, manji 9087 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 2:12pm Subject: Re: Seeing Realities - beginners class/Frank Hi Frank, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., frank kuan wrote: > Hi Christine, > I just read a great sutta in SN the other day. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Christine: Can you quote the name and number, or better still, a link? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The > Buddha talks about the importance of developing > concentration. The deepening of concentration allows > us to get a more direct perception of impermanence. > When we get a deeper perception of impermanence, then > we are seeing deeper into reality. > How do we deepen concentration? I think the answer > will differ for everyone. The obvious answer is to > meditate, but if meditation seems to yield little > progress, then the 5 hindrances are acting up and we > have to deal with those that are particularly > troublesome for me. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Christine: I guess that is where I am at the moment. I seem to have lost the 'desire' to meditate formally i.e.(sitting/walking). I am not sure whether this is a 'hindrance' like 'sloth and torpor' that I should do battle with, or whether I am leaning towards another way. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -fk > > p.s. the more I see how much the Buddha in the early > suttas emphasizes the practical matters of cultivation > and "seeing reality", i.e. seeing impermanence of the > world, the 3 marks applied to the six sense bases, the > 5 aggregates of clinging, ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Christine: This is the point of my question....Do we have to 'only formally meditate'....if not, are there simple, for me - very simple, instructions on learning the skill of 'seeing reality'? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- the more I doubt the later > buddhist scriptures have any validity whatsoever as > the authentic word of the Buddha. The styles and > material are just SO INCONGRUOUS. > > Here's a worldly poem on impermanence I ran into > recently. > > Death of the Day (1858) by Walter Savage Landor > > My pictures blacken in their frames > As night comes on, > And youthful maids and wrinkled dames > Are now all one. > > Death of the day! a sterner Death > Did worse before; > The fairest form, the sweetest breath, > Away he bore. > So - 'the down to earth, call a spade a spade' Frank that we all know and love, also quotes poetry. What an unexpected delight! :-) Also by Walter Savage Landor: from "Why, why repine.." Why, why repine, my pensive friend, At pleasures slipp'd away? Some the stern Fates will never lend, And all refuse to stay. I see the rainbow in the sky, The dew upon the grass, I see them, and I ask not why They glimmer or they pass. from "to Age" Thanks for expelling Fear and Hope, One vile, the other vain; One's scourge, the other's telescope, I shall not see again. Rather what lies before my feet My notice shall engage-- He who hath braved Youth's dizzy heat Dreads not the frost of Age. The two quotes below are what I remind myself of when trying to overcome the difficulties I have understanding Dhamma. A quote by Thomas Paine The harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly; it is dearness only that gives everything its value. I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress and grow brave by reflection. 'Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death. A quote by Bertolt Brecht 'Don't be afraid of death so much as an inadequate life. ' metta, Christine 9088 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 10:51am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Seeing Realities - beginners class/Frank Hi, Christine - In a message dated 11/2/01 5:14:41 PM Eastern Standard Time, cforsyth@v... writes: > Christine: I guess that is where I am at the moment. I seem to have > lost the 'desire' to meditate formally i.e.(sitting/walking). I am > not sure whether this is a 'hindrance' like 'sloth and torpor' that I > should do battle with, or whether I am leaning towards another way. > ========================= I have found that centering mindfulness on the body (on breath, bodily position, sensation, movement, solidity etc) during ordinary non-meditative states, whenever not having to attend completely to some specific complex task, is a wonderful practice, which also leads, almost automatically, to mindfulness of volition, thoughts etc, and is especially useful when done with an "eye" to observing the impermanence and conditioned status of all aspects of experience. Moreover, this practice tends to make the more focussed formal sitting and walking meditation easier, and, that formal meditation will, in turn help support the first. 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) 9089 From: manji Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 5:21pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Realities - beginners class Hi Christine, When the conditions are right, there will be cetasika accompanying citta that "knows" dhamma... as it rises and falls. Maybe at first there is reflection of an event in the last split second, but then there are new dhamma. Sometimes things were disappearing before the eyes, and there was an idea that before there was just assumption whenever things reappeared. So when there is an object that appears for the senses, there was some sort of "assumption" of the object that arose, so it felt like it was "always" there. However, later, that "assumption" started to get really clear. It is a cetasika. After cultivating one-pointedness, this became very clear. Objects last for a bit and then new objects arise, then there is identifying and more, just like abhidhamma expresses. Thinking... it is very important to understand that this "knowing dhamma rising and falling" is conditioned. So right now at this very moment, we are seeing nama rupa... concepts too. Right now. Meditation and one-pointedness cultivation really sets this process in a magnifying glass. The focus wavers, and then that is when objects are rising and falling. Sometimes people cultivate jhana, and skip the dhamma learning process. So never cultivating wisdom of dhamma rising and falling, so maybe its harder to really feel the rise and fall in concentrated states. So there is not wisdom cultivated, just safe place. Middle way, there are reasons that being born human is a most fortunate vehicle of liberation, because can there can be experience of all dhammas. This same thing is taught many times. When there is a mental - physical object shift, i am thinking that those moments are very good training. They might make big breaks in process. For instance, taking sound as an object (not the ear sense, and not the concept, but real sound)... now shifting to another sense-object, or mental object. If there is sufficient concentration, there is a moment between the shifting. This is where there is many many dhamma rising and falling. Maybe for a moment the older object is completely vanished, but when the object reappears, it seems like it was always there. Sometimes when concentration is really advanced, things that reappear seem to jump right out although its been there all along. What is happening? But not what happened... What is happening right now? Also vedana and all the cetasika are like this... the citta... the rupa... concepts... all dhamma. Rising and falling, except one :) So much looking at objects, what is in between, from one to the other? Important understanding that these nama - rupa rising and falling... anatta... anatta... not self. So there are lots of questions, lots of answers... right now dhamma rising, right now dhamma falling. Sounds very nice that you are practicing and asking good questions :) Maybe putting to much different things in this mail, but maybe wisdom growing and deeper seeing. Prajna Paramita... musha shugyo, manji ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christine Forsyth" To: Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 6:01 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Realities - beginners class > Dear All, > > I have asked this question on DL and have taken Robert's advice to > ask it here as well. > > I have been reading 'Understanding Reality' by Nina van Gorkom > http://www.zolag.co.uk/realf.pdf > > She teaches that the Ariyan Disciple sees things as they really are > and is not enslaved to the worldly conditions...... > > 'Seeing realities" - how do you *practice* such a thing? If one > wishes to learn meditation using the breath as object, there are lots > of articles, books, workshops and retreats. Many successful methods > exist for sitting, walking, lying or standing meditation. In any > group, there will people who have at least an elementary > understanding of meditation and are able to discuss it. > > I have not found this is so with 'seeing realities'. Meditation on > the breath is now "mainstream" - 'seeing realities' is considered by > most everyday ordinary people as 'a little unusual', even > many 'stylised' meditation practitioners. > > How do you practice "seeing realities"? I look at a person, a car or > a tree - and it is already a person or a car or a tree in my mind. > In my perception it is already labelled. And the same with > feelings....I already feel happy, sad, ill, or excited. They are > defined immediately I am aware of them. > Are there step-by-step instructions, a method, for learning this > skill of 'seeing things as they really are'? > > For instance, is it like 'walking meditation' ? Is 'naming' used. > The way I was initially taught this with regard to walking > meditation was to start of with the large movements 'step, step' , > then gradually the step is dissected into smaller and smaller named > parts, with intentions inserted where noticed as well. When > concentration is established and strong, the labels and segmenting > are dropped and smooth awareness of the whole movement is maintained. > > I would be grateful for any basic, simple replies (if that is > possible). > > metta, > Christine > 9090 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 7:19pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Realities - beginners class Christine --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > Dear All, > > I have asked this question on DL and have taken Robert's advice to > ask it here as well. > > I have been reading 'Understanding Reality' by Nina van Gorkom > http://www.zolag.co.uk/realf.pdf > > She teaches that the Ariyan Disciple sees things as they really are > and is not enslaved to the worldly conditions...... > > 'Seeing realities" - how do you *practice* such a thing? If one > wishes to learn meditation using the breath as object, there are lots > of articles, books, workshops and retreats. Many successful methods > exist for sitting, walking, lying or standing meditation. In any > group, there will people who have at least an elementary > understanding of meditation and are able to discuss it. > > I have not found this is so with 'seeing realities'. Meditation on > the breath is now "mainstream" - 'seeing realities' is considered by > most everyday ordinary people as 'a little unusual', even > many 'stylised' meditation practitioners. > > How do you practice "seeing realities"? I look at a person, a car or > a tree - and it is already a person or a car or a tree in my mind. > In my perception it is already labelled. And the same with > feelings....I already feel happy, sad, ill, or excited. They are > defined immediately I am aware of them. > Are there step-by-step instructions, a method, for learning this > skill of 'seeing things as they really are'? > > For instance, is it like 'walking meditation' ? Is 'naming' used. > The way I was initially taught this with regard to walking > meditation was to start of with the large movements 'step, step' , > then gradually the step is dissected into smaller and smaller named > parts, with intentions inserted where noticed as well. When > concentration is established and strong, the labels and segmenting > are dropped and smooth awareness of the whole movement is maintained. > > I would be grateful for any basic, simple replies (if that is > possible). > > metta, > Christine Thanks very much for asking this question, and I’m glad Robert suggested that you post it here. Your question brings us to the very crux of the Buddha’s teaching, and helps us to focus on how all that theory has application in practice, right now. I recently spent 2 weeks in India with a group from Thailand visiting the Buddhist holy places. During this period we had frequent discussions about this very subject. There were relatively few questions about the more abstruse points of the teachings, as most people on the trip appreciated the significance of hearing again and again about the understanding of the realities appearing at the present moment. And it is not an easy thing to grasp, although it seems so simple on a first hearing. As you have correctly observed, the world as we experience it (ie. a world of people and things) is different from the world as we understand it to be from our studies of the teachings (ie. experiences through the different senses-doors, and a lot of thinking about those experiences). You say— > I look at a person, a car or > a tree - and it is already a person or a car or a tree in my mind. > In my perception it is already labelled. And the same with > feelings....I already feel happy, sad, ill, or excited. They are > defined immediately I am aware of them. Yes, this is how it is for all of us (and even, I believe, for the person with highly developed understanding). And what I think you are implying here is that you understand, in theory at least, that in order for the world to appear to us like this, there must also be different and discrete experiences through the sense- and mind-doors, preceding the labelling as people and things, which are not apparent to us and which happen so rapidly as to give the illusion of people, objects and things. So the starting point is that there are realities arising/appearing now that are not apparent to us in their true nature. [Other terms for realities are ‘dhammas’ or ‘absolute/ultimate realties (paramattha dhammas)’. The labels by which we know and appear to experience the world, on the other hand, are not realities but are a concepts (pannati).] Realities are of 2 basic kinds, and understanding the distinction between the 2 is absolutely crucial. One kind of reality experiences an object. For example, at the moment of reading this message, the consciousness that sees is experiencing visible datum through the eye-door, and the consciousness that thinks is thinking about that datum and finding meaning in it. Every kind of consciousness, whether through one of the sense-doors or the mind-door, is a reality that has the nature of experiencing an object. This kind of reality is termed a ‘naama’ (sometimes translated as ‘mentality’). The other kind of reality does not experience an object. To take the present moment of seeing again, the visible datum that is being experienced by the seeing consciousness cannot itself experience an object. Nor, for example, can the sound that is experienced by hearing consciousness, or the objects of the experiences through the other sense-doors. These kinds of realities are termed ‘ruupa’ (materiality). The beginning of ‘seeing realities’ is the understanding that at this very moment both kinds of realities are appearing but are not known as they truly are. The reason that they are not known for what they are is our accumulate ignorance and lack of awareness, nothing more and nothing less. To overcome this, it is not necessary (or appropriate) to go anywhere or do anything. What is needed is an understanding of what the Buddha said about the reality of present moment, considering the meaning of that and relating that theoretical understanding to the present moment of experience. In this way the veil of ignorance can gradually be lifted. This may all sound absolutely basic, even simplistic (or ‘Dhamma 101’, as some would no doubt characterise it), but the importance of understanding the significance of just this much cannot be overestimated. It is easy to think that there must be something more, something to be done, some technique to be taken up or applied; but that, I believe, would be to fall into the trap of wrong view. The task is a long term one and progress can only ever be exceedingly slow. We cannot hope within a single lifetime to advance our understanding of realities as they truly are by more than a fraction. But it is important to understand that we all have a level of such accumulated understanding, and this can be the basis for further development at this very moment, since we all appreciate the significance (urgency) of developing understanding and we all have the capacity to understand at an intellectual level and reflect usefully on what we have heard. Indeed, we have all already done so to varying degrees in this lifetime – what is perhaps lacking, because of other views we also hold, is the relating of that intellectual understanding to the realities of the present moment as they appear right now, rather than at some other time or in some other circumstances. Christine, are you with me so far? Please come back with any questions or comments. I very much welcome the chance to discuss this. Jon dhamma -- reality pannati -- concept nama/nama dhamma -- reality that experiences an object rupa/rupa dhamma -- reality that cannot experience and object 9091 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 7:52pm Subject: Re: Lisa's question [Sarah and Robert Ep.] Sarah and Robert Ep, Thank you both. This IS helpful--clear, pertinent, and not too many Pali words! Robert, you wrote recently (message 8990) "...I would say there's a big difference between understanding something as a concept and experiencing it." This distinction keeps coming up for me too. Do you think understanding the concept is a necessary precursor to the experience? It seems like conceptual understanding can be an aid to experiential understanding, or it can be a hinderance. Lisa --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Dear Rob Ep and Lisa, > > Rob Ep wrote this post (below) recently and I thought it was beautifully > written with a good explanation as to why some people like himself 'have been > attracted to this list'.... I might quibble over a few minor points, but I > thought the 'gist' was spot on and very sincere. > > Lisa, as I was clearing out old posts, I thought of your question and wondered > if you might find it helpful. I know Rob Ep will be delighted if you wish to > pursue any of his comments further..... > > Thanks Rob....;-) > > Sarah > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Kenneth, > > I think the answer for most on this list is that the deepest nature of both > > beings > > and phenomena are anatta and anicca. I have not been used to looking at > > anatta as > > a 'nature' or essence, since it is a negation and thus doesn't indicate > > anything > > to me. > > > > But that is exactly, I think, the point of the pure Theravadins on this list: > > > > that anatta being the deepest nature of everything, there is absolutely > > nothing to > > hang onto about oneself or any effect that is caused or any arising > > phenomena. > > They are all absolutely freely arisen with no causal factor other than the > > factors > > that have arisen and vanished in the arising conditions immediately prior, > > and > > previous material or influences which that immediately arising and ceasing > > condition has carried with it and passed to the next arising set of > > co-arising > > conditions. > > > > Anicca is the complementary component to anatta, because if something has no > > central entity, it also has nothing that can outlast the moment. So > > impermanence > > and non-entity work together to insure that there is nothing to identify as a > > real > > self, and nothing to hold onto in the shifting stream of time and shifting > > conditions and effects. There is nothing to do but sit back and become more > > discerning of what is happening. There is no action to take which is not > > ordained > > by some other action. > > > > I think this is a very deep and comprehensible philosophy, with a little > > effort. > > But it is very difficult to take. I think this philosophy is even a good > > medicine > > for those like myself who believe that there is something else involved in > > the > > process. Why? Because it erases or reveals the slightest clinging to a > > notion of > > self. Even if there were that primordial consciousness at the end of the > > rainbow > > which I feel is there, any notion I may have of it or cling to is in fact not > > 'it', because it is also, whatever it is, necessarily beyond clinging to self > > or > > possession. The surest medicine for everyone, Theravadin or Mahayanist, is > > to > > know that every notion we have of self or dhamma or Nibbana, is false, and is > > just > > grist for the mill of discernment. Whatever is at the end of the journey, > > this is > > still the medicine that erases and reveals all clingings. > > > > I think that is why some of us that tend towards Mahayana have been attracted > > to > > this list and its understandings. We who tend to be idealist need a good > > dose of > > anatta to reveal our subtle clingings to self, and there is no real > > substitute for > > this. It is a rigorous and demanding process, to eradicate the notion of > > something there to hold onto or to 'salvage' from the enlightenment process. > > > > > > We will all agree, I think, that even our most precious notions will have to > > be > > washed out in the trickle and eventual flood of discernment. > > > > Regards, > > Robert > > > > =========================== > 9092 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 8:40pm Subject: Re: Hello...[Jon, Robert] Thank you both for your thoughtful answers to my question. Dan kindly printed them out so I can easily read them several times. Below is an attempt at expressing the state of my understanding of the answer. I'd appreciate corrections or comments. > If one doesn't have wisdom, how does one choose the right action? First, "right action" is a technical term. It has a different meaning here than it would in other company. I'm not sure exactly what it means, but it does not mean "moral action," though "right action" would be moral by virtue of the mental state from which it sprang. Second, it is impossible to choose the right action. If one doesn't have enough wisdom, one can't tell whether an action is right or not. If one does have enough wisdom, there is no choice involved. If one wonders if one has enough wisdom to discern right action, the answer is "no," but if one does not wonder, the answer is still probably "no." So the thing to do is to acquire wisdom. But maybe "acquire" is the wrong verb, because it seems like I can't just learn something, pack it away, and go on. I have to keep going back to reconsider, because it's likely that I've fallen into a trap, as Robert alluded to ("...our strengths turn out to be faults..."). So acquiring wisdom is more like losing delusion. Lisa 9093 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 9:56pm Subject: Re: Hello...[Jon, Robert] --- Your thinking looks very sound to me, Lisa. Especially the fact that you rasp the subtlety of right action. I also see wisdom as akin to losing delusion. There are different levels of right action and some right actions can be done without wisdom. Some people , for example, are very generous simply because of past habit. Or Num spoke of his childhood where he did good actions without really knowing why. Of course, as you said, it depends on the underlying mental state as to whether these actions were genuinely good: probably there were moments of 'good' alternating with those rooted in bad states. We have a lot of discussion about choice on this list. When we 'choose' to do something it is really because of complex factors arising that coincide for such a thought to arise. Nothing wrong with that and so it is perfectly natural that we make so many 'choices'each day. Wisdom, though, uncovers the conditioned nature of choice and so it can be seen that, at the deepest level, control is an illusion. Paradoxically knowing that there is no true control "one" is more "in control" than ever before. This is because there is wisdom that performs its function of discerning and knowing what is right and wrong: no 'one' getting in the way to complicate and confuse things. A very long path to get to the stage where that 'one' is gone for good. robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., lisa14850@y... wrote: > Thank you both for your thoughtful answers to my question. Dan kindly > printed them out so I can easily read them several times. Below is > an attempt at expressing the state of my understanding of the answer. > I'd appreciate corrections or comments. > > > If one doesn't have wisdom, how does one choose the right action? > > First, "right action" is a technical term. It has a different meaning > here than it would in other company. I'm not sure exactly what it > means, but it does not mean "moral action," though "right action" > would be moral by virtue of the mental state from which it sprang. > > Second, it is impossible to choose the right action. If one doesn't > have enough wisdom, one can't tell whether an action is right or not. > If one does have enough wisdom, there is no choice involved. If one > wonders if one has enough wisdom to discern right action, the answer > is "no," but if one does not wonder, the answer is still probably > "no." So the thing to do is to acquire wisdom. > > But maybe "acquire" is the wrong verb, because it seems like I can't > just learn something, pack it away, and go on. I have to keep going > back to reconsider, because it's likely that I've fallen into a trap, > as Robert alluded to ("...our strengths turn out to be faults..."). > So acquiring wisdom is more like losing delusion. > > Lisa 9094 From: Date: Fri Nov 2, 2001 11:54pm Subject: Re: Focus > > > If the focal point of practise is not sati for the Abidhammaist (hope you > do not mind I use this word), what is their focus. I think the problem > lies on the fact that I am a Suttaist, hence sati is the focus. But I do > not know abt Abidhammaist bc Abidhammaist classify sati as cetasika. What > is the goal or focus? > > >____________ Dear Ken, Sarah will hopefully answer this. I think there is not a difference in this matter between Suttaists and Abhidhammikas. Satipatthana is given a whole section in the Vibhanga(book of Abhidhamma). The key to it all - and I know you realise this very well- is that sati needs to arise in conjunction with wisdom to be genuine satipatthana. Thus, whatever dhamma sati knows is, at some level, it doesn't have to be in words, understood as: not mine, as conditioned phenomena, anatta. This is the same whether one studies sutta or Abhidhamma. Like Frank said the important suttas so often mention the 5khandas and ayatanas (6senses), much like the Abhidhamma. I appreciate your input here and on d-l. robert 9095 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 0:58am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Rid of impurities... Alex It’s nice to hear from you again! --- axtran@h... wrote: > Make an island unto yourself! > Strive hard and become wise! > Rid of impurities and cleansed of stain, > you shall not come again to birth and decay. > > Dhammapada 238 > > Dear friends, > > The above verses seem the Buddha suggests a lot of controlling. I > don't know if they are translated incorrectly from Pali. Please help. > > Thank you. > > With Appreciation, > Alex Tran There are many instances, especially in the Dhammapada, when the Buddha seems (on a superficial reading) to have spoken in terms that suggest a self or control. Yet we know that the themes of non-self and lack of any control are central to his teaching. The explanation lies, I think, in the fact that sometimes the Buddha’s audience was capable of understanding the deeper meaning of his teaching without the need for the fine detail or extended explanation. To these listeners the Buddha could speak in normal conventional language yet still convey his unique message. In cases like this we can see how necessary it is to have a good general knowledge of the teachings, or access to the commentaries, in order to avoid getting the wrong idea. Then there is, as you also mention, the problem of translations. Alex, it is my understanding that no amount of ‘striving hard’ of the conventional kind can lead to wisdom. The conditions that lead to wisdom that understands the true nature of the reality appearing at the present moment are far more subtle and deep than that. So I think the striving being referred to here is the kind that comes from a proper appreciation of the urgency and immensity of the task that results eventually in escape from samsara. The more wisdom has been developed, the more this can be appreciated and the more there can be 'striving hard' of the appropriate kind. I would be interested in hearing your own thoughts on any aspect of this verse, Alex. Thanks again for your post. Jon 9096 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 1:13am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Pali in Singapore (was, dhammavicaya II) Ken O --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Gayan > > Suddenly I become very interested in Pali because of you :). Do you > know > any good Pali Language centre in Singapore. > > Thanks and keep posting and I enjoy them very much > > Kinde regards > Kenneth Ong I don't know if you've found anywhere yet, but one of our (lurking) list members in Singapore would probably know if there is a good place to learn Pali. Her name is Pinna Indorf, and she can be reached at akiindof@n.... Good luck! Jon 9097 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 1:52am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Focus Robert K Many thanks for the information. I did not realise that there is a section of Vibhanga(book of Abhidhamma) on Satipatthana. By the way where can I get this book in English hopefully with commentaries or link. I find it difficult to understand Abidhamma without commentary. I agree with Frank, the suttas are linked with the Abidhamma, hence there is a need to understand the Abidhamma. I say in D-L list, without understanding anatta and anicca it is difficult to understand satipatthana. Kind regards Kenneth Ong > > > >____________ > > Dear Ken, > Sarah will hopefully answer this. I think there is not a difference > in this matter between Suttaists and Abhidhammikas. Satipatthana is > given a whole section in the Vibhanga(book of Abhidhamma). > The key to it all - and I know you realise this very well- is that > sati needs to arise in conjunction with wisdom to be genuine > satipatthana. > Thus, whatever dhamma sati knows is, at some level, it doesn't have > to be in words, understood as: not mine, as conditioned phenomena, > anatta. > This is the same whether one studies sutta or Abhidhamma. Like Frank > said the important suttas so often mention the 5khandas and ayatanas > (6senses), much like the Abhidhamma. > I appreciate your input here and on d-l. > robert 9098 From: Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 1:58am Subject: Re: Focus --- Dear Ken, Actually I was a little unclear: Frank referred to the suttas about the khandas and ayatanas - and I just added in that it was similar to Abhidhamma. The Vibhanga is translated as The Book of Analysis and the commentary is a 2 volume set; The Dispeller of Delusion . Both are available from the Pali text society and both are very good translations. best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > Robert K > > Many thanks for the information. I did not realise that there is a > section of Vibhanga(book of Abhidhamma) on Satipatthana. By the way where > can I get this book in English hopefully with commentaries or link. I > find it difficult to understand Abidhamma without commentary. I agree > with Frank, the suttas are linked with the Abidhamma, hence there is a > need to understand the Abidhamma. I say in D-L list, without > understanding anatta and anicca it is difficult to understand > satipatthana. > > > > > > Kind regards > Kenneth Ong > > > > > > > > > >____________ > > > > Dear Ken, > > Sarah will hopefully answer this. I think there is not a difference > > in this matter between Suttaists and Abhidhammikas. Satipatthana is > > given a whole section in the Vibhanga(book of Abhidhamma). > > The key to it all - and I know you realise this very well- is that > > sati needs to arise in conjunction with wisdom to be genuine > > satipatthana. > > Thus, whatever dhamma sati knows is, at some level, it doesn't have > > to be in words, understood as: not mine, as conditioned phenomena, > > anatta. > > This is the same whether one studies sutta or Abhidhamma. Like Frank > > said the important suttas so often mention the 5khandas and ayatanas > > (6senses), much like the Abhidhamma. > > I appreciate your input here and on d-l. > > robert 9099 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 3:47am Subject: Re: Seeing Realities - beginners class Hi Manji, Thank you for your kind reply. I feel a sense of encouragement from your post to persevere with formal meditation - I did find that I developed strong concentration on a 10 day Vipassana retreat, though I developed an almost unbearable awareness of the suffering of all beings and I am not sure I would have the courage to repeat that experience. But to combine daily meditation with periods of strengthening of general mindfulness and study of the Realities seems attractive to me. Yes, it is true that being born human is 'a most fortunate vehicle of liberation.' To be always happy - why would you want to escape? To be always suffering - where would you get the energy to think about more than surviving the moment and enduring? I find your mention of the 'mental-physical object shift' intriguing and worthy of further investigation. Do you have any links to readings or articles on this? You say,'maybe putting to much different things in this mail, but maybe wisdom growing and deeper seeing' - I really do believe some understanding is growing. Recently (on another list) some explanations began to seem easily understandable, whereas previously,they had just gone over my head. So whatever I don't understand in a post (even enough to ask questions), I let go and now know that eventually (with diligence) the understanding will come. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "manji" wrote: > Hi Christine, > > When the conditions are right, there will be cetasika accompanying citta > that "knows" dhamma... as it rises and falls. Maybe at first there is > reflection of an event in the last split second, but then there are new > dhamma. > > Sometimes things were disappearing before the eyes, and there was an idea > that before there was just assumption whenever things reappeared. So when > there is an object that appears for the senses, there was some sort of > "assumption" of the object that arose, so it felt like it was "always" > there. However, later, that "assumption" started to get really clear. It is > a cetasika. > > After cultivating one-pointedness, this became very clear. Objects last for > a bit and then new objects arise, then there is identifying and more, just > like abhidhamma expresses. > > Thinking... it is very important to understand that this "knowing dhamma > rising and falling" is conditioned. So right now at this very moment, we are > seeing nama rupa... concepts too. Right now. > > Meditation and one-pointedness cultivation really sets this process in a > magnifying glass. The focus wavers, and then that is when objects are rising > and falling. Sometimes people cultivate jhana, and skip the dhamma learning > process. So never cultivating wisdom of dhamma rising and falling, so maybe > its harder to really feel the rise and fall in concentrated states. So there > is not wisdom cultivated, just safe place. Middle way, there are reasons > that being born human is a most fortunate vehicle of liberation, because can > there can be experience of all dhammas. > > This same thing is taught many times. > > When there is a mental - physical object shift, i am thinking that those > moments are very good training. They might make big breaks in process. > > For instance, taking sound as an object (not the ear sense, and not the > concept, but real sound)... now shifting to another sense-object, or mental > object. If there is sufficient concentration, there is a moment between the > shifting. This is where there is many many dhamma rising and falling. Maybe > for a moment the older object is completely vanished, but when the object > reappears, it seems like it was always there. Sometimes when concentration > is really advanced, things that reappear seem to jump right out although its > been there all along. What is happening? But not what happened... What is > happening right now? > > Also vedana and all the cetasika are like this... the citta... the rupa... > concepts... all dhamma. Rising and falling, except one :) > > So much looking at objects, what is in between, from one to the other? > Important understanding that these nama - rupa rising and falling... > anatta... anatta... not self. > > So there are lots of questions, lots of answers... right now dhamma rising, > right now dhamma falling. > > Sounds very nice that you are practicing and asking good questions :) Maybe > putting to much different things in this mail, but maybe wisdom growing and > deeper seeing. > > Prajna Paramita... > > musha shugyo, > manji > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Christine Forsyth" > To: > Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 6:01 AM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Realities - beginners class > > > > Dear All, > > > > I have asked this question on DL and have taken Robert's advice to > > ask it here as well. > > > > I have been reading 'Understanding Reality' by Nina van Gorkom > > http://www.zolag.co.uk/realf.pdf > > > > She teaches that the Ariyan Disciple sees things as they really are > > and is not enslaved to the worldly conditions...... > > > > 'Seeing realities" - how do you *practice* such a thing? If one > > wishes to learn meditation using the breath as object, there are lots > > of articles, books, workshops and retreats. Many successful methods > > exist for sitting, walking, lying or standing meditation. In any > > group, there will people who have at least an elementary > > understanding of meditation and are able to discuss it. > > > > I have not found this is so with 'seeing realities'. Meditation on > > the breath is now "mainstream" - 'seeing realities' is considered by > > most everyday ordinary people as 'a little unusual', even > > many 'stylised' meditation practitioners. > > > > How do you practice "seeing realities"? I look at a person, a car or > > a tree - and it is already a person or a car or a tree in my mind. > > In my perception it is already labelled. And the same with > > feelings....I already feel happy, sad, ill, or excited. They are > > defined immediately I am aware of them. > > Are there step-by-step instructions, a method, for learning this > > skill of 'seeing things as they really are'? > > > > For instance, is it like 'walking meditation' ? Is 'naming' used. > > The way I was initially taught this with regard to walking > > meditation was to start of with the large movements 'step, step' , > > then gradually the step is dissected into smaller and smaller named > > parts, with intentions inserted where noticed as well. When > > concentration is established and strong, the labels and segmenting > > are dropped and smooth awareness of the whole movement is maintained. > > > > I would be grateful for any basic, simple replies (if that is > > possible). > > > > metta, > > Christine 9100 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 3:56am Subject: Re: Seeing Realities - beginners class Hi Howard, Your post is very clear, encouraging and understandable - thank-you. I see it was not the case of needing to choose either formal meditation or mindulness or study.....nothing need be excluded. I'll see how it goes, metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Christine - > I have found that centering mindfulness on the body (on breath, bodily > position, sensation, movement, solidity etc) during ordinary non- meditative > states, whenever not having to attend completely to some specific complex > task, is a wonderful practice, which also leads, almost automatically, to > mindfulness of volition, thoughts etc, and is especially useful when done > with an "eye" to observing the impermanence and conditioned status of all > aspects of experience. Moreover, this practice tends to make the more > focussed formal sitting and walking meditation easier, and, that formal > meditation will, in turn help support the first. > > 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) 9101 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 5:13am Subject: Re: Seeing Realities - beginners class Hi Jon, I am really glad I asked the questions on this list - I have received encouragement and learned a great deal from the replies here and from Amara, Kenneth O. and Robert K. on DL. Your explanation of the realities 'naama' and 'ruupa' and the distinction between them is quite clear and I understand it. At least while I read your words. :-) Once again the term 'accumulate' or 'accumulations' comes up. Amara also mentioned this. I understand you to say that one's accumulations are not an impenetrable barrier, that they can be overcome, and the way to do this is to know and contemplate (?) the Buddha's teachings on 'the reality of the present moment' and integrate theory with experience. You say. 'The task is a long term one, and can only ever be exceedingly slow. We cannot hope within a lifetime to advance our understanding of realities as they truly are by more than a fraction.' This is logical, this is believable; but this is very difficult for me to hear. I came to the Teachings via the tradition of Mahasi Sayadaw. My first Dhamma and meditation teacher, Patrick Kearney, was of this tradition, and had for some years worn the robes. He, for whom I have the deepest respect and gratitude, plus a book by U Pandita called "In This Very Life", have been pivotal in my staying within Buddhism for more than a quick sampling of whatever flavour was on offer. Patrick lives and works in another State now, and there is little chance of contact, but finding my own way is an adventure, and I have found new teachers on the Net as well. However - I want to find the foundation of truth, 'what is', whether it fits with what I have been previously taught, or what I hope for, or not. I would appreciate hearing more. Metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Christine > > Thanks very much for asking this question, and I'm glad Robert suggested > that you post it here. Your question brings us to the very crux of the > Buddha's teaching, and helps us to focus on how all that theory has > application in practice, right now. > > I recently spent 2 weeks in India with a group from Thailand visiting the > Buddhist holy places. During this period we had frequent discussions > about this very subject. There were relatively few questions about the > more abstruse points of the teachings, as most people on the trip > appreciated the significance of hearing again and again about the > understanding of the realities appearing at the present moment. And it is > not an easy thing to grasp, although it seems so simple on a first > hearing. > > As you have correctly observed, the world as we experience it (ie. a world > of people and things) is different from the world as we understand it to > be from our studies of the teachings (ie. experiences through the > different senses-doors, and a lot of thinking about those experiences). > You say— > > > I look at a person, a car or > > a tree - and it is already a person or a car or a tree in my mind. > > In my perception it is already labelled. And the same with > > feelings....I already feel happy, sad, ill, or excited. They are > > defined immediately I am aware of them. > > Yes, this is how it is for all of us (and even, I believe, for the person > with highly developed understanding). And what I think you are implying > here is that you understand, in theory at least, that in order for the > world to appear to us like this, there must also be different and discrete > experiences through the sense- and mind-doors, preceding the labelling as > people and things, which are not apparent to us and which happen so > rapidly as to give the illusion of people, objects and things. > > So the starting point is that there are realities arising/appearing now > that are not apparent to us in their true nature. [Other terms for > realities are `dhammas' or `absolute/ultimate realties (paramattha > dhammas)'. The labels by which we know and appear to experience the > world, on the other hand, are not realities but are a concepts (pannati).] > > Realities are of 2 basic kinds, and understanding the distinction between > the 2 is absolutely crucial. One kind of reality experiences an object. > For example, at the moment of reading this message, the consciousness that > sees is experiencing visible datum through the eye-door, and the > consciousness that thinks is thinking about that datum and finding meaning > in it. Every kind of consciousness, whether through one of the > sense-doors or the mind-door, is a reality that has the nature of > experiencing an object. This kind of reality is termed a `naama' > (sometimes translated as `mentality'). > > The other kind of reality does not experience an object. To take the > present moment of seeing again, the visible datum that is being > experienced by the seeing consciousness cannot itself experience an > object. Nor, for example, can the sound that is experienced by hearing > consciousness, or the objects of the experiences through the other > sense-doors. These kinds of realities are termed `ruupa' (materiality). > > The beginning of `seeing realities' is the understanding that at this very > moment both kinds of realities are appearing but are not known as they > truly are. The reason that they are not known for what they are is our > accumulate ignorance and lack of awareness, nothing more and nothing less. > To overcome this, it is not necessary (or appropriate) to go anywhere or > do anything. What is needed is an understanding of what the Buddha said > about the reality of present moment, considering the meaning of that and > relating that theoretical understanding to the present moment of > experience. In this way the veil of ignorance can gradually be lifted. > > This may all sound absolutely basic, even simplistic (or `Dhamma 101', as > some would no doubt characterise it), but the importance of understanding > the significance of just this much cannot be overestimated. It is easy to > think that there must be something more, something to be done, some > technique to be taken up or applied; but that, I believe, would be to > fall into the trap of wrong view. > > The task is a long term one and progress can only ever be exceedingly > slow. We cannot hope within a single lifetime to advance our > understanding of realities as they truly are by more than a fraction. But > it is important to understand that we all have a level of such accumulated > understanding, and this can be the basis for further development at this > very moment, since we all appreciate the significance (urgency) of > developing understanding and we all have the capacity to understand at an > intellectual level and reflect usefully on what we have heard. Indeed, we > have all already done so to varying degrees in this lifetime – what is > perhaps lacking, because of other views we also hold, is the relating of > that intellectual understanding to the realities of the present moment as > they appear right now, rather than at some other time or in some other > circumstances. > > Christine, are you with me so far? Please come back with any questions or > comments. I very much welcome the chance to discuss this. > > Jon > > dhamma -- reality > pannati -- concept > nama/nama dhamma -- reality that experiences an object > rupa/rupa dhamma -- reality that cannot experience and object > 9102 From: Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 4:16pm Subject: Re: Concepts Dear Robert, Thank you for your engaging post. It is a further opportunity to reflect on the Dhamma. When you talk of suffering are you talking about vedana type suffering, which could also include pleasure in it's continuum. Or are you talking about the suffering a la Noble Truth which isn't to do with vedana? If you are talking about the first type of suffering, then I agree with you. Bodily and mental suffering is a reality that can be experienced. And so is bodily and mental pleasure. But I do not think that the Noble Truth of suffering is about vedana. I think it is more along the lines of that if reality is incorrectly grasped, when permanence or personality are attributed to phenomena, then this is suffering regardless of whether it feels good or bad. And when there is the correct grasping of reality, if only for a split second, then that moment is free of suffering, regardless of whether it feels good or bad. When reality is incorrectly grasped then a concept is formed. A concept is not real, it can be the object of the mind only. But these objects of mind can feed on themselves, and as we all know it is entirely possible to live within this illusory realm for days, years, millenia on end. This mistaking the illusion for reality is suffering. And again, this suffering can feel very good. That's why it just goes on and on. I still wouldn't call Dukkha real, it is more of a meta-quality. And in a moment of awareness it is not there. Happy to hear any dissenting view of course All the best Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > Herman, > Let me give you my initial answers to some very interesting questions. > > The last, first: > > The idea that suffering occurs to a non-existent being and thus is non-existent > itself is an easy conclusion to draw, but in my opinion does not note the reality > correctly. > > Suffering does not occur to the 'concept' 'self' because a concept cannot > experience anything. It is rather an object of consciousness. So where is > suffering experienced? It is experienced by a citta, by consciousness. Since > consciousness actually experiences suffering, suffering is actual. The being that > we *think* is suffering is not real, but the suffering and the consciousness that > experiences it, are. I hope that distinction makes some sense of what is a very > perplexing seeming paradox. > > My conclusion is that compassion arises from this understanding and that the > expression of ultimate compassion is to help the 'cittas' in question to release > the causes of suffering. The path leads to release of clinging and aversion which > cause suffering, and thus the suffering cittas gradually will cease to arise in > more advanced stages. > > One can also try to help relieve physical suffering in the physical world at the > same time without undermining this deeper intention. > > As for anicca, it is again a citta, or consciousness, that is aware of both the > illusion of permanence and the reality of transcence. Without the ability to > remember and compare moments in a single citta, which takes as its content the > reality of the previous moment, I believe there would be no suffering and be no > path. Neither would be possible. It is part of the process of this life, both > delusion and awakening, that this is possible. I don't know what life would be or > what kind of mindfulness we would be capable of if we could absolutely only be > cognisant of the contents of this moment only, without comparing it to another. > It is also clear that the ability to see what is in this moment and what is not is > part of liberation. > > Best, > Robert Ep. > > ================== > > > --- hhofman@d... wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > > > Anicca (impermanence) is known as one of the three marks of > > existence. I assume that anicca is a concept and not a reality to be > > directly known. For how can awareness of the present moment include > > awareness of the previous moment, and thus know it's own passing? How > > can it be a characteristic of a present moment that it is changing? > > There must always be reference to a previous ie imagined reality for > > the deduction of change to be made. > > > > Some commentators suggest that anicca is the basis for anatta and > > dukkha. Phenomena are unsatisfactory, because all things change all > > the time. There is nothing to cling to. Because things change all the > > time there is no core essence in any phenomenon and vice versa, > > therefore the notion of a self is only a concept. There is nothing to > > cling to and noone to do the clinging. > > > > So who or what suffers? A concept. And what does it suffer from? The > > concept of change. And just how real can this suffering be? > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > Herman > > 9103 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 7:27pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello...[Robert E] Dear Dan, I can't argue with anything you say here either. I think I may have been a little too 'reactive' myself to Robert K's post. Probably because I don't want anyone to challenge my pleasant states! They're hard enough to come by! I think it is good to be on the lookout for all the subtle elements that attend each state of consciousness that arises. That is part of mindfulness. I also think that if one feels 'confidence', 'joy', and other positive-seeming states, it is good to inquire into their true content, but a mistake to crush the experience by being too suspicious of our happier moments. It's probably a question of balance like everything else. Robert Ep. ================ --- dalthorp@o... wrote: > Hi Robert E., > It's tough to argue with most of your comments, but I don't think > that Robert K is espousing the view that you are attributing to him. > > Comments interspersed... > > Rob E: > > I find the description of everything that seems positive in life as > really being a > > hidden negative to be a rather critical view, rather than merely a > discerning > > view. Is our joy at a moment of love really just conceit and > attachment? Is the > > feeling of real confidence just conceit, and a moment of peace > really a clinging > > to quiet? > > Moments of real love (metta? karuna? mudita? adosa?) must be free of > conceit and attachment. But are moments that we might feel joy at > what we term "love" really free of conceit and attachment? Or is > there attachment, lust, craving, pity? Discernment of the difference > between attachment and non-attachment is critical, and in this > ignorant confluence of 5 aggregates, attachment is much, MUCH more > common. > > >I don't agree with this. I think the really free moments in life > which > > appear unimpeded and functionally unobstructed are real, and that > it is the > > accompanying insecurities, fears and clingings, which are not > really that hard to > > identify -- they always have a nasty feeling somewhere in their > occurence -- to be > > the defilements that interfere with the unimpeded flow of momentary > experiences. > > It is true that dosa is associated with nasty feeling somewhere, but > consciousness rooted in lobha (craving) can be pleasant or neutral. > Dosa is easier to recognize, it is unpleasant, and it can have such > sharp negative external consequences that are obvious; but lobha > (craving, clinging, lust, attachment) is more difficult to recognize, > may be pleasant, may not always have sharp external consequences. > Development is much more difficult than trying to avoid the things > with nasty feeling evident (dosa) and pursuing the things without > nasty feeling evident (both lobha and kusala). This may be why Buddha > said "Greed is a lesser fault and fades away slowly; hatred is a > great fault and fades away quickly..." (AN 3:68) > > > If we imagine an Arahat's experience after Nibbana and before > Parinibbana to be > > one in which each moment in life is clearly discerned and dealt > with without > > hesitation, confusion or remorse, I would say we all have moments > like this, only > > they are few and far between, and the growing of awareness and > lessening of > > attachment increases the occurence of these kusala cittas. > > Right. > > > To see all of our 'good' feelings as attachments and delusions > > All? > > To see all 'good' (pleasant?) feelings as attachment and delusion > would indeed be a grave mistake. But to fail to realize how > frequently what we think is 'good' (pleasant) is really 'bad' > (attachment, delusion) is also a grave mistake. > > > > > sense. I don't > > look at life this way. I see it as inherently illusory but neither > good nor bad. > > Attachment and clinging cause suffering, they are also > neither 'good' nor 'bad'. > > Attachment and clinging cause suffering and are called 'akusala'. Non- > attachment (with wisdom) leads away from suffering and so is > called 'kusala'. > > > Why not accept and enjoy the moments in life that are not > experienced as > > suffering, and deal with the sufferings and defilements when they > arise? > > I don't think anyone here is saying "don't accept and enjoy" moments > that are not filled with dosa. But it is critical to recognize lobha > as lobha. 9104 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 7:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 --- upasaka@a... wrote: .....The pain I have in my knee today has many charateristics in > common with the pain I had there yesterday, but it is not "the same pain"... I may be blowing smoke at myself, but the idea that I am fooling around with here seems very important...If I can express it properly and get you to see what I'm driving at, I would be interested in whether it seems equally significant to you. Here it is: The knee in your pain today is 'not the same pain' as the pain you had yesterday. But, and here's the but.....: Since the pain you had yesterday was not really an entity called 'pain', the pain you have today is also not 'different' from that other pain. You can't have something that's different from something that doesn't exist, any more than you can have something the same as something that doesn't exist. So the proper definition would be that the pain you have today is neither the same nor different than the pain you had yesterday. And that is the kind of thing that the Buddha often said. On a second point, I don't think that Ken, or myself for that matter, were particularly concerned about whether the cittas that might arise again would be the same ones or not, but rather whether the arising of cittas as a phenomenon had actually been annihilated, or had just 'ceased', meaning the productions of cittas could potentially arise again, rather than being permanently eradicated. That is the reference in which I said that if conditions were to arise again......then cittas might arise again. Not the same ones, but the mechanism of their occurence. however, your answer, that Nibbana is that state of realization in which there are no separate arisings perceived because that mechanism has been seen to be illusory, sort of pre-empts the whole question. When it's put that way, i don't any longer have a 'citta' problem, or even an experience problem, because: nothing has been annihilated, the cessation has happened as a transformation from within, not a change in the status of cittas. This seems appropriate to me, it is you not the objects that have changed,and I doubt Kenneth will have a problem with this either. So much for speaking for Kenneth without permission!! Anyway, your whole post was very worthwhile and illuminating. Robert Ep. ================ 9105 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 7:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello...[Robert E] --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: I heard a tape where Alan Weller asked T.A. Sujin > about enjoyments etc. in life. She replied that she thought one > should follow what one enjoys, but with wisdom. I think Robert E. was > getting at this in his post. > So what we don't want to do is become serious, uptight, anal > retentive prudes; plenty of these around already.;) > robert Thank you, Robert! Yes, I think you understood where my discomfort was here. I wasn't thinking exactly your words above, but I think if we get too serious in a certain way, it gets a little frightening. The path is hard enough without pulling so hard on the reins that we feel choked. I appreciate the comments. Robert Ep. 9106 From: Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 7:58pm Subject: Goodness no, Robert E! As always, I am enjoying your comments. The following in particular struck me: > I think it is good to be on the lookout for all the subtle elements that attend > each state of consciousness that arises. That is part of mindfulness. I also > think that if one feels 'confidence', 'joy', and other positive- seeming states, it > is good to inquire into their true content, but a mistake to crush the experience > by being too suspicious of our happier moments. > > It's probably a question of balance like everything else. Of course we should not crush happier moments by being suspicious of them. That would be horrific! However, when awareness arises, it becomes clearer just how often akusala cittas arise, how addicted we are to reacting with aversion to the unpleasant and craving for the pleasant. There is no question about "crushing" anything. On the contrary, such an awareness is liberating (to a degree). Taking the suspicion approach would too easily lead to crushing! Instead, let's just work on development of discernment and understanding. In appreciation, Dan 9107 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 8:00pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Udana-Nibbana 1 - probably new now. --- manji wrote: > Below... > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robert Epstein" > To: > Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 12:01 AM > Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Udana-Nibbana 1 > > > > > I agree Ken. I think the point you have been trying to make lately about > > attaching to views is very important, and very hard to get. Since every > direction > > we think we are taking on the path is in a sense a view, expectation or > > anticipation of something not yet experienced, it is almost the same as > asking > > Hmm, "every direction we think..." this right here is part of abhidhamma, > the > very thing being discussed. Of course it is view, but how about this... The > truth is... > > There is direction. There is path. There is rupa. There is nama. There is > suffering. > > This is different than... My direction, My rupa, My nama, My Suffering... > Some > say "Life is suffering" but this is not the case, this is not knowing dhamma > now. > > There is suffering, just as there is direction. And in essence... not self, > empty. > > > people to give up 'the path', at least the path in their mind. Very hard. > That > > is why the zen concept of beginner's mind is very helpful. To keep going > back to > > understanding that one cannot actually know anything, even the path, > except by > > direct experiencing of its principles in the moment. > > > > Robert Ep. > > The beginner's mind has no concept. No kamma making. It may be just after ;) > About knowing... there is knowing, there is wisdom, there is mind. There is > sanna. > > Someone mentioned earlier about importance. This is abhidhamma - right now > nama. > Right now cetasika... conditioning the sense of "importance". Conditioning a > sense of > urgency. And what sense is this? It is cetasika. > > So right now understanding conditioning, and understanding "conditioning of > path". > > It was taught somewhere that "it is like taking a path to get to someplace, > you travel > toward that place... conditioned. And once you are there there is no > travelling, no need > for the direction, no more need for the way." It is then you stand in what > is unconditioned. > Of course, there cannot be this when there is always reaching mind, > identifying > and reaching. > > walk softly, > manji =================== Thanks manji, Your emphasis on the reality of the present condition is very refreshing. thanks for relieving me of a few concepts I didn't really need to have. Robert Ep. 9108 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 8:06pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Realities - beginners class Wow, Manji, Thanks for the very nice talk. Once again, I appreciate your pulling the understanding of cittas and cetasikas into the context of the present moment, something that Sarah has also urged. Your explanation of cittas and cetisikas was very helpful. I hadn't quite understood cetasikas the way you explained it. It seems you are making clear that it is really the quality of the cetasikas that determines the progress of understanding. This is very interesting, as my emphasis was always on the consciousness, citta, and was thinking of the cetasikas as mainly mechanical functions. My education is slow, but it is gradually progressing. Very nice! Thanks again, Robert Ep. ================== --- manji wrote: > Hi Christine, > > When the conditions are right, there will be cetasika accompanying citta > that "knows" dhamma... as it rises and falls. Maybe at first there is > reflection of an event in the last split second, but then there are new > dhamma. > > Sometimes things were disappearing before the eyes, and there was an idea > that before there was just assumption whenever things reappeared. So when > there is an object that appears for the senses, there was some sort of > "assumption" of the object that arose, so it felt like it was "always" > there. However, later, that "assumption" started to get really clear. It is > a cetasika. > > After cultivating one-pointedness, this became very clear. Objects last for > a bit and then new objects arise, then there is identifying and more, just > like abhidhamma expresses. > > Thinking... it is very important to understand that this "knowing dhamma > rising and falling" is conditioned. So right now at this very moment, we are > seeing nama rupa... concepts too. Right now. > > Meditation and one-pointedness cultivation really sets this process in a > magnifying glass. The focus wavers, and then that is when objects are rising > and falling. Sometimes people cultivate jhana, and skip the dhamma learning > process. So never cultivating wisdom of dhamma rising and falling, so maybe > its harder to really feel the rise and fall in concentrated states. So there > is not wisdom cultivated, just safe place. Middle way, there are reasons > that being born human is a most fortunate vehicle of liberation, because can > there can be experience of all dhammas. > > This same thing is taught many times. > > When there is a mental - physical object shift, i am thinking that those > moments are very good training. They might make big breaks in process. > > For instance, taking sound as an object (not the ear sense, and not the > concept, but real sound)... now shifting to another sense-object, or mental > object. If there is sufficient concentration, there is a moment between the > shifting. This is where there is many many dhamma rising and falling. Maybe > for a moment the older object is completely vanished, but when the object > reappears, it seems like it was always there. Sometimes when concentration > is really advanced, things that reappear seem to jump right out although its > been there all along. What is happening? But not what happened... What is > happening right now? > > Also vedana and all the cetasika are like this... the citta... the rupa... > concepts... all dhamma. Rising and falling, except one :) > > So much looking at objects, what is in between, from one to the other? > Important understanding that these nama - rupa rising and falling... > anatta... anatta... not self. > > So there are lots of questions, lots of answers... right now dhamma rising, > right now dhamma falling. > > Sounds very nice that you are practicing and asking good questions :) Maybe > putting to much different things in this mail, but maybe wisdom growing and > deeper seeing. > > Prajna Paramita... > > musha shugyo, > manji > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Christine Forsyth" > To: > Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 6:01 AM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Realities - beginners class > > > > Dear All, > > > > I have asked this question on DL and have taken Robert's advice to > > ask it here as well. > > > > I have been reading 'Understanding Reality' by Nina van Gorkom > > http://www.zolag.co.uk/realf.pdf > > > > She teaches that the Ariyan Disciple sees things as they really are > > and is not enslaved to the worldly conditions...... > > > > 'Seeing realities" - how do you *practice* such a thing? If one > > wishes to learn meditation using the breath as object, there are lots > > of articles, books, workshops and retreats. Many successful methods > > exist for sitting, walking, lying or standing meditation. In any > > group, there will people who have at least an elementary > > understanding of meditation and are able to discuss it. > > > > I have not found this is so with 'seeing realities'. Meditation on > > the breath is now "mainstream" - 'seeing realities' is considered by > > most everyday ordinary people as 'a little unusual', even > > many 'stylised' meditation practitioners. > > > > How do you practice "seeing realities"? I look at a person, a car or > > a tree - and it is already a person or a car or a tree in my mind. > > In my perception it is already labelled. And the same with > > feelings....I already feel happy, sad, ill, or excited. They are > > defined immediately I am aware of them. > > Are there step-by-step instructions, a method, for learning this > > skill of 'seeing things as they really are'? > > > > For instance, is it like 'walking meditation' ? Is 'naming' used. > > The way I was initially taught this with regard to walking > > meditation was to start of with the large movements 'step, step' , > > then gradually the step is dissected into smaller and smaller named > > parts, with intentions inserted where noticed as well. When > > concentration is established and strong, the labels and segmenting > > are dropped and smooth awareness of the whole movement is maintained. > > > > I would be grateful for any basic, simple replies (if that is > > possible). > > > > metta, > > Christine 9109 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 8:15pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lisa's question [Sarah and Robert Ep.] --- lisa14850@y... wrote: > Sarah and Robert Ep, > > Thank you both. This IS helpful--clear, pertinent, and not too many > Pali words! I know what you mean! I'm just getting familiar with a few of them, after being here a few months. > Robert, you wrote recently (message 8990) > > "...I would say there's a big difference between understanding > something as a concept and experiencing it." > > This distinction keeps coming up for me too. Do you think > understanding the concept is a necessary precursor to the experience? > It seems like conceptual understanding can be an aid to experiential > understanding, or it can be a hinderance. Boy, that's an interesting question. I think that conceptual understanding is often the seed-bed from which more direct insight comes. I think it's a balance. Concepts are like tools, they make distinctions that can help you look at things differently. But they also have to be applied in some way. I think that when i practiced yoga and meditation without a really clear theoretical framework, I had more direct experiences but didn't have anywhere to put them in a sense. Looking at the concepts about enlightenment, eightfold path, and anicaa and anatta in a way give my experiences and my thoughts a structure to work with. If you get lost in the structure, then your concepts are working against you. If they give you a basis for understanding that you then compare and apply to your experiences, I think it is very valuable to have an ongoing study that deepens your knowledge. Personally, I find meditation to be the best place to put concepts and experiential practice together, although I sometimes find it hard to take the time to sit. Others are more analytic or contemplative in the way they approach understanding. But that combination of understanding and experience I think is essential. Robert Ep. 9110 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 8:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Concepts --- hhofman@d... wrote: > Dear Robert, > > Thank you for your engaging post. It is a further opportunity to > reflect on the Dhamma. > > When you talk of suffering are you talking about vedana type > suffering, which could also include pleasure in it's continuum. > > Or are you talking about the suffering a la Noble Truth which isn't > to do with vedana? > > If you are talking about the first type of suffering, then I agree > with you. Bodily and mental suffering is a reality that can be > experienced. And so is bodily and mental pleasure. > > But I do not think that the Noble Truth of suffering is about vedana. > I think it is more along the lines of that if reality is incorrectly > grasped, when permanence or personality are attributed to phenomena, > then this is suffering regardless of whether it feels good or bad. > And when there is the correct grasping of reality, if only for a > split second, then that moment is free of suffering, regardless of > whether it feels good or bad. > > When reality is incorrectly grasped then a concept is formed. A > concept is not real, it can be the object of the mind only. But these > objects of mind can feed on themselves, and as we all know it is > entirely possible to live within this illusory realm for days, years, > millenia on end. This mistaking the illusion for reality is > suffering. And again, this suffering can feel very good. That's why > it just goes on and on. > > I still wouldn't call Dukkha real, it is more of a meta-quality. And > in a moment of awareness it is not there. Dear Herman, Well, I don't want to be too surprising, but I like this view very much, and appreciate your very wise description of the connection of suffering and delusion. I have been lucky in my life to have a few moments here and there where it seemed that the world was laid out as it is and there was no sense of having a concept. Just direct perception. These moments never lasted very long, but I would have to call them 'bliss', not because there was any intense sensation of pleasure or anything like that, but because everything was simply itself. So I agree that a single moment of awareness dispels concept and delusion. I once complained to my teacher at the time that these experiences seemed very profound but always went away. He said they were good signs, but shouldn't be held onto. Obviously, there were plenty of tendencies at play that would remove this perspective and throw me back into a deluded state, even while I watched. Well the sense of the I-watching was not ready to get put away. The idea that 'suffering' doesn't have to feel bad is a little tough for me. What makes it suffering then? i would say delusion can feel great but really be not so great, and I would understand if you said this would lead to more suffering, but if there is no suffering experienced, where is the suffering at that moment? Other than this question, I greatly appreciate your wise comments. Robert Ep. =========================================== > Happy to hear any dissenting view of course > > All the best > > Herman > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > Herman, > > Let me give you my initial answers to some very interesting > questions. > > > > The last, first: > > > > The idea that suffering occurs to a non-existent being and thus is > non-existent > > itself is an easy conclusion to draw, but in my opinion does not > note the reality > > correctly. > > > > Suffering does not occur to the 'concept' 'self' because a concept > cannot > > experience anything. It is rather an object of consciousness. So > where is > > suffering experienced? It is experienced by a citta, by > consciousness. Since > > consciousness actually experiences suffering, suffering is actual. > The being that > > we *think* is suffering is not real, but the suffering and the > consciousness that > > experiences it, are. I hope that distinction makes some sense of > what is a very > > perplexing seeming paradox. > > > > My conclusion is that compassion arises from this understanding and > that the > > expression of ultimate compassion is to help the 'cittas' in > question to release > > the causes of suffering. The path leads to release of clinging and > aversion which > > cause suffering, and thus the suffering cittas gradually will cease > to arise in > > more advanced stages. > > > > One can also try to help relieve physical suffering in the physical > world at the > > same time without undermining this deeper intention. > > > > As for anicca, it is again a citta, or consciousness, that is aware > of both the > > illusion of permanence and the reality of transcence. Without the > ability to > > remember and compare moments in a single citta, which takes as its > content the > > reality of the previous moment, I believe there would be no > suffering and be no > > path. Neither would be possible. It is part of the process of > this life, both > > delusion and awakening, that this is possible. I don't know what > life would be or > > what kind of mindfulness we would be capable of if we could > absolutely only be > > cognisant of the contents of this moment only, without comparing it > to another. > > It is also clear that the ability to see what is in this moment and > what is not is > > part of liberation. > > > > Best, > > Robert Ep. > > > > ================== > > > > > > --- hhofman@d... wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > Anicca (impermanence) is known as one of the three marks of > > > existence. I assume that anicca is a concept and not a reality to > be > > > directly known. For how can awareness of the present moment > include > > > awareness of the previous moment, and thus know it's own passing? > How > > > can it be a characteristic of a present moment that it is > changing? > > > There must always be reference to a previous ie imagined reality > for > > > the deduction of change to be made. > > > > > > Some commentators suggest that anicca is the basis for anatta and > > > dukkha. Phenomena are unsatisfactory, because all things change > all > > > the time. There is nothing to cling to. Because things change all > the > > > time there is no core essence in any phenomenon and vice versa, > > > therefore the notion of a self is only a concept. There is > nothing to > > > cling to and noone to do the clinging. > > > > > > So who or what suffers? A concept. And what does it suffer from? > The > > > concept of change. And just how real can this suffering be? > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > > > Herman 9111 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 8:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Goodness no, Robert E! --- dalthorp@o... wrote: > As always, I am enjoying your comments. The following in particular > struck me: > > > I think it is good to be on the lookout for all the subtle elements > that attend > > each state of consciousness that arises. That is part of > mindfulness. I also > > think that if one feels 'confidence', 'joy', and other positive- > seeming states, it > > is good to inquire into their true content, but a mistake to crush > the experience > > by being too suspicious of our happier moments. > > > > It's probably a question of balance like everything else. > > Of course we should not crush happier moments by being suspicious of > them. That would be horrific! However, when awareness arises, it > becomes clearer just how often akusala cittas arise, how addicted we > are to reacting with aversion to the unpleasant and craving for the > pleasant. There is no question about "crushing" anything. On the > contrary, such an awareness is liberating (to a degree). Taking the > suspicion approach would too easily lead to crushing! Instead, let's > just work on development of discernment and understanding. That is a good idea. And a lot of work. Best, Robert 9112 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 10:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Seeing Realities - beginners class Christine Many thanks for your reply and well-considered comments. I know you have been putting a lot of thought into these areas for some time. --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > Hi Jon, > > I am really glad I asked the questions on this list - I have received > encouragement and learned a great deal from the replies here and from > Amara, Kenneth O. and Robert K. on DL. > > Your explanation of the realities 'naama' and 'ruupa' and the > distinction between them is quite clear and I understand it. At least > while I read your words. :-) > > Once again the term 'accumulate' or 'accumulations' comes up. Amara > also mentioned this. I understand you to say that one's > accumulations are not an impenetrable barrier, that they can be > overcome, and the way to do this is to know and contemplate (?) the > Buddha's teachings on 'the reality of the present moment' and > integrate theory with experience. It is I think important to realise that both our virtues (including panna) and our vices (including wrong view) are what they are and how they are because of previous moments of development/accumulation of the same qualities, and that each further moment of these same realities is likewise accumulated ie. passed on. These lie latent and unknown to us unless for whatever reason they manifest at any time, but such manifestation is only ever a partial one. Understanding this helps us to realise how vast the store of accumulated attachment, aversion and wrong view must be that will have to eventually be eradicated if enlightenment is to be attained, and how relatively minute the increment of any wholesomeness (particularly understanding) that may be developed at any one time. While this may only add to your concern about the long-term nature of the task (sorry about that!), I think one only has to contemplate the alternative (ie. no end whatsoever to ignorance and suffering) to see that it is by far the lesser of 2 evils. As far as overcoming these accumulations is concerned, only panna (understanding) can finally eradicate ignorance and with it all other defilements. So as long as our focus continues to be on the development of the understanding that knows the reality appearing at the present moment, this will lead to the necessary 'overcoming' of accumulations. > You say. 'The task is a long term one, and can only ever be > exceedingly slow. We cannot hope within a lifetime to advance our > understanding of realities as they truly are by more than a fraction.' > > This is logical, this is believable; but this is very difficult for > me to hear. > I came to the Teachings via the tradition of Mahasi Sayadaw. My > first Dhamma and meditation teacher, Patrick Kearney, was of this > tradition, and had for some years worn the robes. He, for whom I > have the deepest respect and gratitude, plus a book by U Pandita > called "In This Very Life", have been pivotal in my staying within > Buddhism for more than a quick sampling of whatever flavour was on > offer. Patrick lives and works in another State now, and there is > little chance of contact, but finding my own way is an adventure, and > I have found new teachers on the Net as well. > > However - I want to find the foundation of truth, 'what is', whether > it fits with what I have been previously taught, or what I hope for, > or not. I very much appreciate your sincerity and determination. I think that if one keeps this goal (the truth of 'what is') in mind at all times, it makes the task of understanding the teachings and sorting out the true path much easier. It is easy to become distracted with thoughts of 'what should be', but this would be an obstacle to development of the path. Jon 9113 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Sun Nov 4, 2001 0:15am Subject: Consciousness Dear All, While looking for information on how consciousness operates (with respect to the idea of not-self),I came across this article on "The Quantum Mechanical Model of Brain and Consciousness" by Dr. Granville Dharmawardena. http://www.lanka.com/dhamma/misc/science4.htm Has anyone seen it before? Not being of a Science background, I find it hard to assess. EXCERPT: "However computer models are many orders of magnitude slower than needed to account for the speed of human beings. A Neurologist has calculated that if the brain was a standard serial or a parallel computer it would take more time than the age of the universe to perform all the necessary calculations associated with just one perceptual event. But if the brain were a quantum computer, it would try out all the various possible combinations of data arrangement at once and thus unify its experience. Many who research on the brain-mind problem proceed with the a priori assumption that consciousness is an emergent property of the brain. They consider consciousness as another property, emerging as a result of P from trillions of electrical pulses shuttling across the brain. According to this assumption consciousness is only a property and not an entity. John Searle introduces consciousness as a natural biological phenomenon that does not fit comfortably into either of the traditional categories of mental and physical, caused by lower level micro processors in the brain. However on the basis of practical observations made by us and many others we have to reject these assumptions and regard consciousness as a non-material entity capable of independent existence. Observations on OBE (Out of Body Experience ) and NDE (Near Death Experience ) show that while the body is in an anaesthetized or inactive state consciousness can remain disembodied, observe events from outside the body and later relocalize in the brain. After the body renormalizes the person can relate what his consciousness observed and heard from an out of body location while the body was inactive. Other experiments have shown that consciousness can leave a dying person, float around observing things and events and later, as Eccles had pointed out, attach itself to an unborn foetus to start a new existence as another individual." If this has been posted before - my apologies to any to whom it is 'old news'. But, if the article is "true", how will it impact/if at all on the Teachings? (Given the urging of the Kalamma Sutta not to just believe but to investigate everything.) metta, Christine 9114 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 4, 2001 0:51am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1-Howard Hi Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Sarah - > > > Howard: > > > Just a request for clarification: Found in which pitakas? And if > > it is > > > found in the suttas, is it clear there that nibbana is intended to be a > > > positively existing separate dhamma being observed by cittas, or is > > > "observing nibbana" more along the lines of the mind getting a glimpse of > > > what it is like to have ignorance dispelled, a glimpse of the way things > > > really are when seen truly? ------------------------------------------------------ Sarah: > > Howard, I thought this was pretty clear in the earlier Udana Com notes > > accompanying the sutta (ie Nibbana as unconditioned, experienced by the > > conditioned)... I'm not quite sure where the problem is. --------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I don't recall anything there about nibbana being experienced by > conditioned mind states. Also, when it is said that there is that realm where > > there is neither earth nor fire etc, that simply describes the functioning of > > mind freed of defilements, and not an object to be observed. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: > I thought these> > > passages made it clear that nibbana is the unconditioned 'base' or arammana > > > for > > the conditioned cittas to experience and indeed is itself a condition in > > this > > way. --------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Not at all clear to me. Sorry. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: I don’t wish to requote the notes which I’m sure your read carefully anyway. So I’ll just try to add my own ‘point’ notes and reasonings from the passages quoted: 1. Nibbana was spoken of as a ‘base’, as object condition for the ‘knowledges associated with the paths and their fruitions and so on’, just as visible objects are the object conditions for eye-consciousness. 2. Nibbana is discussed as the ‘unconditioned element’ in contrast to all other conditioned elements. 3. Paths and their fruitions (magga and phala cittas) are conditioned elements which take nibbana, the unconditioned element as object. 4. Nibbana has ‘its own nature’ which is ‘antithetical to all formations (sankhara). and there is nothing conditioned to be found within it. 5. When describing the nature of nibbana, it is made clear that it does not contain the 4 great elements, derived materiality (rupas), the conditioned namas (and not even those experienced in the arupa planes which are not dependent on rupas). ******************** We may just have to agree to differ and move on, although I’m very happy to keep discussing (and re-quoting any of the notes if need be). .................... Sarah: > I think they also make it clear tha nibbana is an 'existing separate> > > dhamma'....No? > > I think that whenever there are moments of right understanding of > > realities, > > 'things' are 'seen truly'. ----------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Yes, there are moments of relative clarity, even in the midst of > samsara. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: > So there has to be a lot of accumulated wisdom and> > > to the very highest degree, seeing things (ie conditioned realities) truly, > > BEFORE the unconditioned reality is realised or experienced. After the > > final > > remnants of ignorance have been eradicated totally, there must continue to > > be > > plenty of cittas with right understanding, seeing conditioned realities as > > they > > are and the eradicated defilements are 'reviewed'. > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > To me, cittas are conventional existents, though, since I am mired > with defilement, they don't seem merely conventional - very little of > anything does. Nibbana, the state undefiled by the three poisons, is a state > to be realized, not to be observed as an object. Who stands where to view > such an object?! ---------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: We can talk about a concept of seeing or hearing or any other citta. Still, they can be proved to be real and not mere labels whenever there is a moment of sati and panna, even now. We open our eyes and there is the ‘reality’ of seeing immediately and so on. According to the Abhidhamma, It is the magga citta (path consciousness) which we read eradicates defilements according to the stage of enlightenment reached. This citta is said to ‘transcend’ the state of the ordinary person, bcoming the state of a noble person. The magga citta conditions the following phala citta (fruition consciousness) which is lokuttara vipaka citta (supramundane result consciousness). All these cittas (along with a ‘change-of-lineage’ one arising before them) have nibbana as object. I wouldn’t say it is observed, it is experienced or realized as you say. There is of course no ‘who’ but merely moments of consciousness falling away in fast succession as always. Following these cittas there are bhavanga cittas (as usual) and then mind door process cittas which review the enlightenment, the magga and phala cittas and the defilements which have been eradicated (and those still remaining if arahatship has not been ‘attained’ yet). Nibbana is also reviewed. I can try to add more details if it helps. .................... Sarah: > > In between, of course, there must be many moments of seeing, hearing and > > other > > vipaka cittas (as now) which are not accompanied by wisdom. My point is > > that > > even for the arahat, wisdom doesn't last for more than an 'instant'. > > --------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Really! So are you saying, then, that there were moments at which the > Buddha was without wisdom? > ---------------------------------------------------------- Sarah; Yes. For example whenever vipaka cittas (such as seeing, hearing and so on arise). These are never accompanied by wisdom or awareness. Only the 7 universal cetasikas arise with all cittas. .................... Sarah: > I really don't find it helpful to separate the suttas, the abhidhamma or > > these > > ancient commentaries. I think we need to consider them all and use whatever > > assistance they give us to help us understand what we're reading. Without a > > little understanding of the abhidhamma or the commentary notes, we're bound > > > to > > read certain suttas, like the one which I've been discussing, with another > > interpretation. > > ----------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Well, we differ on this. I consider the suttas as primary. I consider > the rest as helpful resources (as I do the Mahayana sutras and commentaries). ------------------------------------------------------ Sarah: Understood and respected, Howard. However, the Tipitaka which was recited from memory as heard by the Buddha’s disciples (all arahats) at the 1st council, held shortly after the Buddha’s parinibbana in Rajgir (Rajagaha), consisted of the Abhidhamma Pitaka and Vinaya Pitaka as well as the Sutas. These were all considered ‘primary’ and continued to be recited until written down in the 1st century B.C. They’ve continued to be considered as primary at all councils since (along with the Commentaries mentioned by Rob K). I amy be wrong here, but it seems the commentaries are only separated - or non-existent - from the other texts in the English translations. I know that in the Thai Tipitaka, for example, the commentaries are considered as an integral part of the Tipitaka which is incomplete without them. (Suan, Gayan or Jim would know more about these details and may like to add any comments.) ------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Thanks, Sarah. I'm pleased, particularly because I have no doubt you > won't be so much in love with this current post of mine! ;-)) ========================= Sarah: Let me just say, I’m always glad to hear from you, Howard. You consider very carefully and I’d much rather you write and comment where you have a different understanding. It could get boring if we all agreed too;-) This is a lot more challenging. Best wishes as always, Sarah 9115 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 4, 2001 1:29am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Focus Dear KenO, > > If the focal point of practise is not sati for the Abidhammaist > (hope you > > do not mind I use this word), what is their focus. I think the > problem > > lies on the fact that I am a Suttaist, hence sati is the focus. > But I do > > not know abt Abidhammaist bc Abidhammaist classify sati as > cetasika. What > > is the goal or focus? Well, I think Rob K has answered this (below). I prefer not to call myself (or even think of myself) as an 'anything-ist'. Whichever part of the Tipitaka I'm reading and considering, I understand it to be about the development of sati and panna and in particular the knowing of realities as anatta. As Rob suggests, we read about the same realities in the Suttas as in the Abhidhamma. In the Sabba Sutta, the Budha says that the 6 pairs of bases are the 'All' and in the Vibhanga a lot more detail is given on what the mind base includes. In the Samyutta Nikaya, Sayayatanavagga (6 Sense Bases) we are constantly reminded of the value of sense restraint, the dangers of unwholesome states and the value of mindfulness and wisdom. As Jon reminded us, the defilements arise because the cittas attach to the nimitta (signs) and anubyanjana (features) of sense objects (sound, taste and so on), forming up the proliferations (papanca). So we are reminded that in seeing, there is only seeing, in visible object, there is only visible object. The sense faculties are like an ocean, the sense objects like a current and we travel along, facing hazards and dangers that need sense restraint (ie sati) to overcome them. In the Abhidhamma we learn more precise details about the objects, the processes and the consciousness. There is only one goal and one 'focus' ,as I understand, in the Teachings and I don't distinguish between different parts of the Tipitaka in this regard. I very much doubt, however, whether it is possible without some considerable detail gleaned from the Abhidhamma, to really understand the depth of the Suttas. I'm not sure I've contributed further, but I've tried;-) Sarah p.s. Rob K and Ken O (and anyone else), We're hoping to get to Bkk for the New Year w'end (just a couple of days)....nothing fixed yet, but would be great if you could both make it for more 'live' discussions.... > > Dear Ken, > Sarah will hopefully answer this. I think there is not a difference > in this matter between Suttaists and Abhidhammikas. Satipatthana is > given a whole section in the Vibhanga(book of Abhidhamma). > The key to it all - and I know you realise this very well- is that > sati needs to arise in conjunction with wisdom to be genuine > satipatthana. > Thus, whatever dhamma sati knows is, at some level, it doesn't have > to be in words, understood as: not mine, as conditioned phenomena, > anatta. > This is the same whether one studies sutta or Abhidhamma. Like Frank > said the important suttas so often mention the 5khandas and ayatanas > (6senses), much like the Abhidhamma. > I appreciate your input here and on d-l. > robert > 9116 From: Date: Sun Nov 4, 2001 1:44am Subject: Bankok new year --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > > > p.s. Rob K and Ken O (and anyone else), We're hoping to get to Bkk for the New > Year w'end (just a couple of days)....nothing fixed yet, but would be great if > you could both make it for more 'live' discussions.... > >_______________ Dear Sarah, Any chance of making it the 12th- 14th of January?. I booked a ticket last week , to Bangkok, for the above weekend. best wishes robert 9117 From: Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 10:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi, Robert (and Kenneth) - In a message dated 11/3/01 10:43:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, epsteinrob@Y... writes: > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > .....The pain I have in my knee today has many charateristics in > > common with the pain I had there yesterday, but it is not "the same > pain"... > > I may be blowing smoke at myself, but the idea that I am fooling around > with here > seems very important...If I can express it properly and get you to see what > I'm > driving at, I would be interested in whether it seems equally significant > to you. > > Here it is: > > The knee in your pain today is 'not the same pain' as the pain you had > yesterday. > > But, and here's the but.....: Since the pain you had yesterday was not > really an > entity called 'pain', the pain you have today is also not 'different' from > that > other pain. > > You can't have something that's different from something that doesn't > exist, any > more than you can have something the same as something that doesn't exist. > So the > proper definition would be that the pain you have today is neither the same > nor > different than the pain you had yesterday. And that is the kind of thing > that the > Buddha often said. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't disagree with this. They are "the same" certainly in the sense that all things are "the same" - in being empty of separate, independent existance. However, the two instances of conventional pain differ in context (the other events occurring around the same time), and possibly in terms of certain characteristics, and even possibly in terms of the conditions which led to their arising - it is also quite possible that the current pain is not a continuation of the first, but, rather, a "new" pain arising from the continuation of the conditions which led to the arising of the original pain. The matter is complex, actually much moreso than I am indicating. Should the current pain be a continuation of the first, I think that would match up with the Buddha's idea of neither the same nor different (nor both nor neither!). -------------------------------------------------------------- > > On a second point, I don't think that Ken, or myself for that matter, were > particularly concerned about whether the cittas that might arise again > would be > the same ones or not, but rather whether the arising of cittas as a > phenomenon had > actually been annihilated, or had just 'ceased', meaning the productions of > cittas > could potentially arise again, rather than being permanently eradicated. > ----------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Ahhh! That's a different story! The question, then, is whether the process of mental states arising ever stops, not whether specific mind states cease. Okay, that is, indeed, a different issue! ----------------------------------------------------------------- That is> > the reference in which I said that if conditions were to arise > again......then > cittas might arise again. Not the same ones, but the mechanism of their > occurence. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: I would say that, certainly, at *least* for the non-arahant, "when" not immersed in some timeless state, the flow of experience continues, and when conditions of the same sort which occurred previously do arise, consequences of the same sort will result. Conditionality is lawful, objective, and dependable. As far as the arahant is concerned, and now I have to speak speculatively, I think that though experience in its most general sense continues, there is a genuine sense in which the discernment/consciousness of the worldling has ceased, that sense being that there no longer is the seeming of a self/subject apprehending separate, self-existing objects. There is just that nondual experiential reality which is sometimes called "suchness", a description of which is beyond the understanding of us worldlings and beyond the realm of language. -------------------------------------------------------------- > > however, your answer, that Nibbana is that state of realization in which > there are > no separate arisings perceived because that mechanism has been seen to be > illusory, sort of pre-empts the whole question. When it's put that way, i > don't > any longer have a 'citta' problem, or even an experience problem, because: > nothing has been annihilated, the cessation has happened as a > transformation from > within, not a change in the status of cittas. > -------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, exactly! The cessation is the cessation of the three poisons. From my perspective, which I believe is the perspective of many, but certainly not all Theravadins, the notion that nibbana is, in fact, the cessation of experience in every possible sense, a permanent "turning-off-of-the-light" as it were, would be an annihilationist view, and a view at odds with understanding 'bodhi' to mean "awakening" or "enlightenment". ---------------------------------------------------------------- This seems appropriate to me, it is> > you not the objects that have changed,and I doubt Kenneth will have a > problem with > this either. > > So much for speaking for Kenneth without permission!! > > Anyway, your whole post was very worthwhile and illuminating. > --------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I find this whole discussion worthwhile. You are very clear thinking, and you express your thoughts clearly, so that even when I disagree with you (very rarely), I am clear in my own mind as to exactly what it is that I am disagreeing about! ;-) ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Robert Ep. > ============================ 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) 9118 From: Date: Sat Nov 3, 2001 11:12pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1-Howard Hi, Sarah - I respond below to a few parts of your post. In a message dated 11/4/01 3:51:42 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > Hi Howard, > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Sarah - > > > > Howard: > > > > Just a request for clarification: Found in which pitakas? And > if > > > it is > > > > found in the suttas, is it clear there that nibbana is intended to be > a > > > > positively existing separate dhamma being observed by cittas, or is > > > > "observing nibbana" more along the lines of the mind getting a > glimpse of > > > > what it is like to have ignorance dispelled, a glimpse of the way > things > > > > really are when seen truly? > ------------------------------------------------------ > > Sarah: > > > Howard, I thought this was pretty clear in the earlier Udana Com notes > > > accompanying the sutta (ie Nibbana as unconditioned, experienced by the > > > conditioned)... I'm not quite sure where the problem is. > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > I don't recall anything there about nibbana being experienced by > > conditioned mind states. Also, when it is said that there is that realm > where > > > > there is neither earth nor fire etc, that simply describes the > functioning of > > > > mind freed of defilements, and not an object to be observed. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Sarah: > > I thought these> > > > passages made it clear that nibbana is the unconditioned 'base' or > arammana > > > > for > > > the conditioned cittas to experience and indeed is itself a condition > in > > > this > > > way. > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Not at all clear to me. Sorry. > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > Sarah: > I don’t wish to requote the notes which I’m sure your read carefully > anyway. > So I’ll just try to add my own ‘point’ notes and reasonings from the > passages > quoted: > ------------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: My main question on the following, Sarah, is whether it is based directly on the suttas involved or on commentaries about those suttas. ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > 1. Nibbana was spoken of as a ‘base’, as object condition for the ‘ > knowledges > associated with the paths and their fruitions and so on’, just as visible > objects are the object conditions for eye-consciousness. > > 2. Nibbana is discussed as the ‘unconditioned element’ in contrast to all > other > conditioned elements. > > 3. Paths and their fruitions (magga and phala cittas) are conditioned > elements > which take nibbana, the unconditioned element as object. > > 4. Nibbana has ‘its own nature’ which is ‘antithetical to all formations > (sankhara). and there is nothing conditioned to be found within it. > ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Certainly, when 'nibbana' refers to the state free of the three poisons, there is nothing conditioned to be found. --------------------------------------------------------- > > 5. When describing the nature of nibbana, it is made clear that it does not > contain the 4 great elements, derived materiality (rupas), the conditioned > namas (and not even those experienced in the arupa planes which are not > dependent on rupas). --------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Understood, and not questioned. We talk here of the "realm" of no separate conditions at all. --------------------------------------------------------------- > > ******************** > > We may just have to agree to differ and move on, although I’m very happy to > keep discussing (and re-quoting any of the notes if need be). > > .................... > > Sarah: > > I think they also make it clear tha nibbana is an 'existing separate> > > > dhamma'....No? > > > I think that whenever there are moments of right understanding of > > > realities, > > > 'things' are 'seen truly'. > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Yes, there are moments of relative clarity, even in the midst of > > samsara. > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > Sarah: > > So there has to be a lot of accumulated wisdom and> > > > to the very highest degree, seeing things (ie conditioned realities) > truly, > > > BEFORE the unconditioned reality is realised or experienced. After the > > > final > > > remnants of ignorance have been eradicated totally, there must continue > to > > > be > > > plenty of cittas with right understanding, seeing conditioned realities > as > > > they > > > are and the eradicated defilements are 'reviewed'. > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > To me, cittas are conventional existents, though, since I am mired > > > with defilement, they don't seem merely conventional - very little of > > anything does. Nibbana, the state undefiled by the three poisons, is a > state > > to be realized, not to be observed as an object. Who stands where to view > > > such an object?! > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > Sarah: > We can talk about a concept of seeing or hearing or any other citta. Still, > they can be proved to be real and not mere labels whenever there is a > moment of > sati and panna, even now. We open our eyes and there is the ‘reality’ of > seeing > immediately and so on. > > According to the Abhidhamma, It is the magga citta (path consciousness) > which > we read eradicates defilements according to the stage of enlightenment > reached. > This citta is said to ‘transcend’ the state of the ordinary person, > bcoming the > state of a noble person. The magga citta conditions the following phala > citta > (fruition consciousness) which is lokuttara vipaka citta (supramundane > result > consciousness). All these cittas (along with a ‘change-of-lineage’ one > arising > before them) have nibbana as object. I wouldn’t say it is observed, it is > experienced or realized as you say. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Hmm. Careful, Sarah! ;-)) ----------------------------------------------------------------- There is of course no ‘who’ but merely> > moments of consciousness falling away in fast succession as always. > > Following these cittas there are bhavanga cittas (as usual) and then mind > door > process cittas which review the enlightenment, the magga and phala cittas > and > the defilements which have been eradicated (and those still remaining if > arahatship has not been ‘attained’ yet). Nibbana is also reviewed. > ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Surely as a memory, a conditioned, limited "summing up" (by the conventional mind) of a glimpse of the undefiled state . ---------------------------------------------------------- > > I can try to add more details if it helps. > > .................... > > Sarah: > > > In between, of course, there must be many moments of seeing, hearing > and > > > other > > > vipaka cittas (as now) which are not accompanied by wisdom. My point is > > > > that > > > even for the arahat, wisdom doesn't last for more than an 'instant'. > > > > --------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Really! So are you saying, then, that there were moments at which > the > > Buddha was without wisdom? > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > Sarah; > Yes. For example whenever vipaka cittas (such as seeing, hearing and so on > arise). These are never accompanied by wisdom or awareness. Only the 7 > universal cetasikas arise with all cittas. > ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Well, this I find very interesting. So we have Abhidhamma seeming to imply that there were times at which the Buddha was without wisdom. I think this is likely to come as a surprise to *many* Buddhists, including many Theravadins! ------------------------------------------------------------- > > .................... > > Sarah: > > I really don't find it helpful to separate the suttas, the abhidhamma or > > > these > > > ancient commentaries. I think we need to consider them all and use > whatever > > > assistance they give us to help us understand what we're reading. > Without a > > > little understanding of the abhidhamma or the commentary notes, we're > bound > > > > to > > > read certain suttas, like the one which I've been discussing, with > another > > > interpretation. > > > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Well, we differ on this. I consider the suttas as primary. I > consider > > the rest as helpful resources (as I do the Mahayana sutras and > commentaries). > ------------------------------------------------------ > > Sarah: > Understood and respected, Howard. > > However, the Tipitaka which was recited from memory as heard by the Buddha’ > s > disciples (all arahats) at the 1st council, held shortly after the Buddha’s > parinibbana in Rajgir (Rajagaha), consisted of the Abhidhamma Pitaka and > Vinaya > Pitaka as well as the Sutas. These were all considered ‘primary’ and > continued > to be recited until written down in the 1st century B.C. They’ve continued > to > be considered as primary at all councils since (along with the Commentaries > mentioned by Rob K). I amy be wrong here, but it seems the commentaries are > only separated - or non-existent - from the other texts in the English > translations. I know that in the Thai Tipitaka, for example, the > commentaries > are considered as an integral part of the Tipitaka which is incomplete > without > them. (Suan, Gayan or Jim would know more about these details and may like > to > add any comments.) > ------------------------------------------------- > > > > Howard: > > Thanks, Sarah. I'm pleased, particularly because I have no doubt > you > > won't be so much in love with this current post of mine! ;-)) > ========================= > > Sarah: > Let me just say, I’m always glad to hear from you, Howard. You consider > very > carefully and I’d much rather you write and comment where you have a > different > understanding. It could get boring if we all agreed too;-) This is a lot > more > challenging. > > Best wishes as always, > > Sarah > ============================== Thanks much for writing, Sarah. It's always a pleasure! 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) 9119 From: Date: Sun Nov 4, 2001 6:13pm Subject: Bangkok (after) new year G'day Bangkokians, I also will be in Bkk from 5 Jan to 15 Jan 2002. However, I plan to spend most of the time visiting monasteries in the North-East (except perhaps one or 2 days in Bkk). Not sure if I could have time to meet you. Metta, Binh --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > > > > > p.s. Rob K and Ken O (and anyone else), We're hoping to get to Bkk > for the New > > Year w'end (just a couple of days)....nothing fixed yet, but would > be great if > > you could both make it for more 'live' discussions.... > > > >_______________ > Dear Sarah, > Any chance of making it the 12th- 14th of January?. > I booked a ticket last week , to Bangkok, for the above weekend. > best wishes > robert 9120 From: manji Date: Sun Nov 4, 2001 7:36pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Realities - beginners class your welcome! :) -manji- ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Epstein" To: Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 11:06 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Realities - beginners class > Wow, Manji, > Thanks for the very nice talk. > > Once again, I appreciate your pulling the understanding of cittas and cetasikas > into the context of the present moment, something that Sarah has also urged. > > Your explanation of cittas and cetisikas was very helpful. I hadn't quite > understood cetasikas the way you explained it. It seems you are making clear that > it is really the quality of the cetasikas that determines the progress of > understanding. This is very interesting, as my emphasis was always on the > consciousness, citta, and was thinking of the cetasikas as mainly mechanical > functions. > > My education is slow, but it is gradually progressing. > > Very nice! > > Thanks again, > Robert Ep. > > ================== > > > > --- manji wrote: > > Hi Christine, > > > > When the conditions are right, there will be cetasika accompanying citta > > that "knows" dhamma... as it rises and falls. Maybe at first there is > > reflection of an event in the last split second, but then there are new > > dhamma. > > > > Sometimes things were disappearing before the eyes, and there was an idea > > that before there was just assumption whenever things reappeared. So when > > there is an object that appears for the senses, there was some sort of > > "assumption" of the object that arose, so it felt like it was "always" > > there. However, later, that "assumption" started to get really clear. It is > > a cetasika. > > > > After cultivating one-pointedness, this became very clear. Objects last for > > a bit and then new objects arise, then there is identifying and more, just > > like abhidhamma expresses. > > > > Thinking... it is very important to understand that this "knowing dhamma > > rising and falling" is conditioned. So right now at this very moment, we are > > seeing nama rupa... concepts too. Right now. > > > > Meditation and one-pointedness cultivation really sets this process in a > > magnifying glass. The focus wavers, and then that is when objects are rising > > and falling. Sometimes people cultivate jhana, and skip the dhamma learning > > process. So never cultivating wisdom of dhamma rising and falling, so maybe > > its harder to really feel the rise and fall in concentrated states. So there > > is not wisdom cultivated, just safe place. Middle way, there are reasons > > that being born human is a most fortunate vehicle of liberation, because can > > there can be experience of all dhammas. > > > > This same thing is taught many times. > > > > When there is a mental - physical object shift, i am thinking that those > > moments are very good training. They might make big breaks in process. > > > > For instance, taking sound as an object (not the ear sense, and not the > > concept, but real sound)... now shifting to another sense-object, or mental > > object. If there is sufficient concentration, there is a moment between the > > shifting. This is where there is many many dhamma rising and falling. Maybe > > for a moment the older object is completely vanished, but when the object > > reappears, it seems like it was always there. Sometimes when concentration > > is really advanced, things that reappear seem to jump right out although its > > been there all along. What is happening? But not what happened... What is > > happening right now? > > > > Also vedana and all the cetasika are like this... the citta... the rupa... > > concepts... all dhamma. Rising and falling, except one :) > > > > So much looking at objects, what is in between, from one to the other? > > Important understanding that these nama - rupa rising and falling... > > anatta... anatta... not self. > > > > So there are lots of questions, lots of answers... right now dhamma rising, > > right now dhamma falling. > > > > Sounds very nice that you are practicing and asking good questions :) Maybe > > putting to much different things in this mail, but maybe wisdom growing and > > deeper seeing. > > > > Prajna Paramita... > > > > musha shugyo, > > manji > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Christine Forsyth" > > To: > > Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 6:01 AM > > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Realities - beginners class > > > > > > > Dear All, > > > > > > I have asked this question on DL and have taken Robert's advice to > > > ask it here as well. > > > > > > I have been reading 'Understanding Reality' by Nina van Gorkom > > > http://www.zolag.co.uk/realf.pdf > > > > > > She teaches that the Ariyan Disciple sees things as they really are > > > and is not enslaved to the worldly conditions...... > > > > > > 'Seeing realities" - how do you *practice* such a thing? If one > > > wishes to learn meditation using the breath as object, there are lots > > > of articles, books, workshops and retreats. Many successful methods > > > exist for sitting, walking, lying or standing meditation. In any > > > group, there will people who have at least an elementary > > > understanding of meditation and are able to discuss it. > > > > > > I have not found this is so with 'seeing realities'. Meditation on > > > the breath is now "mainstream" - 'seeing realities' is considered by > > > most everyday ordinary people as 'a little unusual', even > > > many 'stylised' meditation practitioners. > > > > > > How do you practice "seeing realities"? I look at a person, a car or > > > a tree - and it is already a person or a car or a tree in my mind. > > > In my perception it is already labelled. And the same with > > > feelings....I already feel happy, sad, ill, or excited. They are > > > defined immediately I am aware of them. > > > Are there step-by-step instructions, a method, for learning this > > > skill of 'seeing things as they really are'? > > > > > > For instance, is it like 'walking meditation' ? Is 'naming' used. > > > The way I was initially taught this with regard to walking > > > meditation was to start of with the large movements 'step, step' , > > > then gradually the step is dissected into smaller and smaller named > > > parts, with intentions inserted where noticed as well. When > > > concentration is established and strong, the labels and segmenting > > > are dropped and smooth awareness of the whole movement is maintained. > > > > > > I would be grateful for any basic, simple replies (if that is > > > possible). > > > > > > metta, > > > Christine 9121 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 4, 2001 9:25pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Bangkok (after) new year G'day Binh, Must be getting pretty hot Down Under in Perth.... Unfortunately, my dates are always fixed pretty well by school terms, so we're planning to go 28th Dec-1st or 2nd Jan (to be finalised). You may get to meet Rob K in Bkk and in anycase k.Sujin and other friends at the Foundation will be delighted to meet you. If you care to contact any of us off-list, we'd be happy to help with any arrangements. I was asking Gayan and Suan yesterday about the Sinhalese and Burmese Tipitakas... You may know about the Cambodian Tipitaka and of course about the Vietnamese one (but i wonder if this is as 'complete'). Sorry, I'm rather ignorant of these details, but would be interested to know which 'versions', like the pali contain all the ancient commentaries as part of the 'whole'. I'm quite sure you'll be a lot more knowledgable on this than I am. Thanks, Sarah p.s. We have a very good Amer. friend who lives in Nakom Phanom (sp?) with her Thai husband. She's v.interested in dhamma and I'm sure would be v.interested to meet you. Pls let me know (off-list) if you'd like her contact details. --- binh_anson@y... wrote: > > G'day Bangkokians, > > I also will be in Bkk from 5 Jan to 15 Jan 2002. However, I plan to > spend most of the time visiting monasteries in the North-East (except > perhaps one or 2 days in Bkk). Not sure if I could have time to meet > you. > > Metta, > Binh > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > > > > > > > p.s. Rob K and Ken O (and anyone else), We're hoping to get to > Bkk > > for the New > > > Year w'end (just a couple of days)....nothing fixed yet, but > would > > be great if > > > you could both make it for more 'live' discussions.... > > > > > >_______________ > > Dear Sarah, > > Any chance of making it the 12th- 14th of January?. > > I booked a ticket last week , to Bangkok, for the above weekend. > > best wishes > > robert 9122 From: Date: Sun Nov 4, 2001 10:01pm Subject: (2) Bangkok (after) new year G'day Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Must be getting pretty hot Down Under in Perth.... BA: Not too bad. The weather has been quite mild lately. However, we have had a squence of low rainfalls in the past few years, and thus, we are facing water restriction this summer and our gardens are not green as they used to be... ---------------------- > You may get to meet > Rob K in Bkk and in anycase k.Sujin and other friends at the Foundation will be > delighted to meet you. If you care to contact any of us off-list, we'd be > happy to help with any arrangements. BA: I would like to meet all dhamma friends. However, to be realistic, I'm not sure if I could, given the time constraint of my staying in Bangkok (as I also plan to see some old friends and in- laws there...). ---------------------------- > > I was asking Gayan and Suan yesterday about the Sinhalese and Burmese > Tipitakas... You may know about the Cambodian Tipitaka and of course about the > Vietnamese one (but i wonder if this is as 'complete'). Sorry, I'm rather > ignorant of these details, but would be interested to know which 'versions', > like the pali contain all the ancient commentaries as part of the 'whole'. I'm > quite sure you'll be a lot more knowledgable on this than I am. BA: Beside visiting Thailand, I will also be visiting Vietnam and will collect information on the Vietnamese translation. However, I will post separately of what I know on the current situation (and I don't have any information on Cambodian Tipitaka). ------------------------- > p.s. We have a very good Amer. friend who lives in Nakom Phanom (sp?) with her > Thai husband. She's v.interested in dhamma and I'm sure would be v.interested > to meet you. BA: Ah... That brings back some good old memories ... :-) I haven't been back to Nakhon Phanom since 1973! Not sure if I will go there this time. I only plan to visits monasteries in Udon, Ubon and Mahasarakham provinces. Metta, Binh 9123 From: Date: Sun Nov 4, 2001 10:27pm Subject: The Vietnamese Tipitaka G'day, As requested by Sarah, below is a brief overview of the Vietnamese Tipitaka. (This information will be updated after January 2002). Binh ------------------------------------------------------------------ A brief overview of the Vietnamese Tipitaka. ============================================ The following books have been translated into Vietnamese language: A. Sutta Pitaka: 1) Digha Nikaya (*) 2) Majjhima Nikaya (*) 3) Samyutta Nikaya (*) 4) Anguttara Nikaya (*) 5) Khuddaka Nikaya (incomplete): 5.1 Khuddaka Patha (*) 5.2 Dhammapada (*) 5.3 Udana (*) 5.4 Itivuttaka (*) 5.5 Sutta Nipata (*) 5.6 Vimana Vatthu (*) 5.7 Peta Vatthu (*) 5.8 Theragatha (*) 5.9 Therigatha (*) 5.10 Jataka (Birth Stories of the Bodhisatta) B. Abhidhamma Pitaka: All 7 books, in hard copy format. C. Vinaya Pitaka: Only the summaries. D. Other works: - Milinda-panha (*) - Mahavamsa (*) - Abhidhammathasanghaha (in hard copy) - Visuddhimagga (*) In addition, texts from the Chinese-Sanskrit source were also translated: A. The 4 Agamas: 1. Dhirga-Agama (*) 2. Madhyama-Agama (*) 3. Ekottara-Agama (*) 4. Samyukta-Agama (*) B. Vinaya books from the Dharmaguptaka and Mahasanghika (*) schools. Those with an asterisk (*) are those with digital files which are available (or will be available in the near future) at my websites: http://www.budsas.org and http://zencomp.com/greatwisdom -ooOoo- Metta, Binh Anson 9124 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sun Nov 4, 2001 11:49pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] samatha Hi Robert K >A key difference between samatha bhavana and vipassaana is that > samatha correctly supresses lobha while vipassana eliminates > ignorance I find this subject interesting. You got any commentary or notes that suggest that samattha (like breathing meditation) suppresses lobha. Kind regards Ken O 9125 From: jesse- Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 0:09am Subject: By request of Sarah :) Sarah was kind enough to welcome me to the group and ask a few questions about me, and I have shared with the level of apprehension I have of the dharma. I have very little formal instruction in buddhism, in the way of reading the texts of the tipitaka. My real learning comes from some readings and more so their applications in life. I find that these teachings are like a jewel, and thus the texts that cause one to bring out these observations are like a diamond in the rough. She has requested that I share with you a little something I wrote, so here you are, verbatim. In this message I am talking about a statement I made prior about how the quote I have in my signature is very beautiful and has "many meanings and no meanings" all at once: Sarah, Actually, I sent this thread to you personally. I didn't know if I should talk about IRC with everyone. :) What I mean by 'many meanings and no meanings' is this: Consider a man who is walking, but has no destination. A person who is in motion, but not going anywhere, equivalent to standing still. Because he is not going anywhere, but still moving, he can be at all places. He is untangled by so many things; he is just walking. Just walking. This is the meaning of 'many meanings and no meanings'. That the quote, and really the dharma, which is what the Buddha is all about, is like this person walking. When you understand it, it has innumerable applications; you can find it in every possible situation. But when you understand it even further, you discover that it is the only thing which actually has any meaning. Therefore to say that it has meaning or does not have meaning is useless; there is nothing else that has meaning. I'm not very good with words, but this is my understanding of the dharma, and these are the thoughts which bring beauty out of the dharma, for me. Hope that was helpful. :) I'm sure you understand in what ways the Buddha's teachings are beautiful, and how it's difficult to share that beauty with other people using just words. The good thing with this study group is that so many people bring their viewpoints together, that together their posts form a somewhat comprehensive view of buddhism. I hope you all have something to say, or that it helps you guys in some way. This, to me, is the meaning of life, to help. Jesse Dhillon. "Subject to decay are all component things; strive earnestly to work out your own salvation." 9127 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 0:11am Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] cittas- sequential and sati Hi Sarah You post to Robert Ep, >I think I can only say to the first 2 questions that this is how it is...and our task is to understand the ‘descriptive’ rather than to reason why.....The only other answer I may add is that they must be exactly this way and cannot be any other way because of the complex way conditions (paccaya) cause them to be like this. So the citta now arises sequentially because of anantara paccaya which means it is conditioned by the preceeding citta to arise sequentially and so many, many other conditions to make it be this citta and no other citta arising. k: I was thinking why can't we have many simultanoues arising and falling of cittas. Why would one have to fall before another arise? This is maybe of our way of thinking due to science that brain works in parallel rather than sequential. Would you like to quote a few commentaries or notes or links that help us understand more on this sequential process. > > Yes, sati (awareness) is a mental factor which sometimes accompanies > citta (consciousness). It accompanies all wholesome (kusala) cittas and is aware of> the object for those moments only. It can be aware of any reality, but is not necessarily (read very seldom if at all) at the level of satipatthana which is aware of a reality as not self. So for example, if there is generosity or kindness without ever having heard the Buddha’s teachings, at the moments these mental states arise with the wholesome cittas, there is sati which is mindful of what is skilful and prevents that which is unskilful, but not necessarily accompanied by wisdom. Mindfulness “does not allow the floating away of moral states” (Atth.) k: Could you give more details on the last quote. Very interesting idea that I like to ponder on. Secondly since sati only accompany the kusala citta, so do we need to be aware when we are have kusala cetasikas for eg metta. Is it due to akusala cittas that might arise due to the falling of kusala cetasikas that we need to practise sati. > ...I think it’s most useful to consider what are the > > realities being experienced at the present moment. By beginning to be > aware (sati being aware) of a nama or rupa (mental or physical phenomena) > now, such as seeing or visible object, feeling or hardness and so on, this is the way sati develops. Being aware of these different realities, and understanding the difference between them, is the only way to develop detachment from the idea of a self or a lasting consciousness. Sati is very precise and has a very specific function and characteristic. k: In a sense, only kusala cittas helps to developed panna, then why do we need to be in sati of akusala cittas as suggeted by Satipatthana. Also does all these conditioning due to our memory that there is a self. Is memory a universal cetasikas. Kind regards Ken O 9128 From: Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 1:57am Subject: Re: samatha --- Dear Ken, Nice you want to know more details. There are a few times where I have seen the commentaries say something to this effect, but I can't put my finger on a quote at the moment. Will look out for it and post it when I see it. best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Robert K > > >A key difference between samatha bhavana and vipassaana is that > > samatha correctly supresses lobha while vipassana eliminates > > ignorance > > I find this subject interesting. You got any commentary or notes that > suggest that samattha (like breathing meditation) suppresses lobha. > > > Kind regards > Ken O > > > 9129 From: Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 4:00am Subject: Re: Concepts Dear Robert, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > The idea that 'suffering' doesn't have to feel bad is a little tough for me. What > makes it suffering then? As long as there is no craving, aversion and ignorance in whatever state one is in, then I guess that is a state free of suffering. Smoking used to feel really good, being in love with my first wife and being a loving and caring father was all very rewarding and satisfactory. Then you start coughing your lungs up, it turns out your wife has a few extra-curricular activities, and your baby dies. Awareness of suffering does not necessarily arise immediately with craving, aversion or ignorance. This is why I think of the three marks of existence as meta- qualities, because without insight these are not realities to be known. All the best Herman 9130 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 4:58am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Realities - beginners class Frank --- frank kuan wrote: > > p.s. the more I see how much the Buddha in the early > suttas emphasizes the practical matters of cultivation > and "seeing reality", i.e. seeing impermanence of the > world, the 3 marks applied to the six sense bases, the > 5 aggregates of clinging, the more I doubt the later > buddhist scriptures have any validity whatsoever as > the authentic word of the Buddha. The styles and > material are just SO INCONGRUOUS. An interesting observation, Frank. I have heard people talk of differences between the early and later texts, but was not sure if these differences extend to content, in the sense of doctrine, or are limited to matters of style. Jon 9131 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 5:01am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Concepts Hi Herman and Robert Ep, Is suffering real? Does vedana related type of suffering also real? Since they are also anatta, where is there a self to experience in a sense? To me, it is real because of our attachment to the illusory self, that is why it is real. My understanding is that suffering is not real, it is real bc the illusory self thought it is real due to our conditioning of this illusory self. But still we have to treat it *real* for now :). Kind regards Ken Ong --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- hhofman@d... wrote: > > Dear Robert, > > > > Thank you for your engaging post. It is a further opportunity to > > reflect on the Dhamma. > > > > When you talk of suffering are you talking about vedana type > > suffering, which could also include pleasure in it's continuum. > > > > Or are you talking about the suffering a la Noble Truth which isn't > > to do with vedana? > > > > If you are talking about the first type of suffering, then I agree > > with you. Bodily and mental suffering is a reality that can be > > experienced. And so is bodily and mental pleasure. > > > > But I do not think that the Noble Truth of suffering is about vedana. > > I think it is more along the lines of that if reality is incorrectly > > grasped, when permanence or personality are attributed to phenomena, > > then this is suffering regardless of whether it feels good or bad. > > And when there is the correct grasping of reality, if only for a > > split second, then that moment is free of suffering, regardless of > > whether it feels good or bad. > > > > When reality is incorrectly grasped then a concept is formed. A > > concept is not real, it can be the object of the mind only. But these > > objects of mind can feed on themselves, and as we all know it is > > entirely possible to live within this illusory realm for days, years, > > millenia on end. This mistaking the illusion for reality is > > suffering. And again, this suffering can feel very good. That's why > > it just goes on and on. > > > > I still wouldn't call Dukkha real, it is more of a meta-quality. And > > in a moment of awareness it is not there. > > Dear Herman, > Well, I don't want to be too surprising, but I like this view very much, > and > appreciate your very wise description of the connection of suffering and > delusion. > I have been lucky in my life to have a few moments here and there where > it seemed > that the world was laid out as it is and there was no sense of having a > concept. > Just direct perception. These moments never lasted very long, but I > would have to > call them 'bliss', not because there was any intense sensation of > pleasure or > anything like that, but because everything was simply itself. So I > agree that a > single moment of awareness dispels concept and delusion. > > I once complained to my teacher at the time that these experiences > seemed very > profound but always went away. He said they were good signs, but > shouldn't be > held onto. Obviously, there were plenty of tendencies at play that > would remove > this perspective and throw me back into a deluded state, even while I > watched. > Well the sense of the I-watching was not ready to get put away. > > The idea that 'suffering' doesn't have to feel bad is a little tough for > me. What > makes it suffering then? i would say delusion can feel great but really > be not so > great, and I would understand if you said this would lead to more > suffering, but > if there is no suffering experienced, where is the suffering at that > moment? > > Other than this question, I greatly appreciate your wise comments. > > Robert Ep. > > =========================================== > > 9132 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 5:16am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Focus - Invitations Hi Sarah Thanks for the invitation. I think the major problem is whether my boss is willing to let me go. He seems to be frowning whenever I asked for overseas leaves. I think a few short days (less than 7 days, 5 days will be just right) could be good. But all dpds on his schedule next month which presently I have no idea. If he is on overseas leave, i definitely cannot be on leave. Bkk is good bc I never been there before :). Kind regards Ken O "p.s. Rob K and Ken O (and anyone else), We're hoping to get to Bkk for the New Year w'end (just a couple of days)....nothing fixed yet, but would be great if you could both make it for more 'live' discussions.... " 9133 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 5:24am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa Ken O My apologies for taking so long to get back to you on this post. (Ken and all: If there are other posts or issues from before or during the India trip that I have not replied to, please feel free to send a reminder -- on or off-list -- as I have lost track of where I got to.) --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > This reference that you have quoted, > VII, 38 > "The noble truth of the way to the cessation of suffering is the Noble > Eightfold Path. In the teaching of the four truths, this is the > collection of eight cetasikas corresponding to the eight path factors > arisen in the cittas of the four supramundane paths. > It should be noted that while in the section on the requisites of > enlightenment, the eight path factors may be either mundane or > supramundane, in the teaching of the Four Noble Truths they are > exclusively supramundane." > > Could you kindly comment why is the Four Noble Truths are exclusively > supramundane. My confusion is that the Four Noble Truths is exclusively > supramundane, how is it going to be supramundane if the eight path > factors which is part of the Four Noble Truth could be mundane. > Furthermore if it is supramundane, how are we going to learn or practise > using mundane effort or understanding. This is a somewhat technical area, and I apologise in advance for the technical nature of the answer. I will try to keep it as brief as possible. What the passage is saying, I think, is that references in the suttas to the Noble Eightfold Path will have slightly different meanings depending on the context-- -- When the Noble Eightfold Path is given as the 4th of the Four Noble Truths, it always refers to the supramundane path, ie. a moment of path consciousness (magga citta). This is because, as I understand it, only at a moment of path consciousness are the Four Noble Truths fully realised. The 3rd and 4th Noble Truths in particular (nibbana and the path leading to it) are truths about the supramundane and are incapable of realisation at any other level. At such path moments, all 8 factors of the Noble Eightfold Path co-arise. -- When the Noble Eightfold Path is given as 8 factors among the 37 factors of enlightenment (bodhipakkhiyadhamma) it will be referring to the mundane path or to both the mundane path and the supramundane path. The mundane path is a moment of satipatthana arising with panna which understands the characteristic of the reality that is the object of awareness at that moment. At such moments, 5 of the 8 path factors arise and accompany the moment of consciousness. These 5 factors are -- samma ditthi (right view), ie. the mental factor that is panna cetasika samma sankappa (right thought), ie. the mental factor that is vitakka cetasika samma vayama (right effort), ie. the mental factor that is viriya cetasika samma sati (right mindfulness), ie. the mental factor that is sati cetasika samma samadhi (right samadhi), ie. the mental factor that is ekaggata cetasika In brief, any reference to the realisation of the 4 Noble Truths is a reference to a moment of path consciousness (the supramundane), while a reference to the factors of enlightenment (bodhipakkhiyadhamma) includes a reference to those who are developing the path but have not yet attained enlightenment. I hope this helps clarify your question. Jon 9134 From: frank kuan Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 5:36am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Concepts --- hhofman@d... wrote: > Awareness of suffering does not necessarily arise > immediately with > craving, aversion or ignorance. > > This is why I think of the three marks of existence > as meta- > qualities, because without insight these are not > realities to be > known. There's a great quote from Warren Buffett, something to the effect of, "all these years, I had been seeing the truth of this with my own eyes but did not capitalize on it, but one day the eyes finally made the connnection with my brain and I understood." The actual quote is much more eloquent, my memory does not do it justice, but it's a great analogy that really points out the huge gap between having a vague awareness of truth and having complete access to the truth and utilizing it in your moment to moment awareness to your benefit and well-being. -fk 9135 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 5:36am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Hi, Num In a recent post you made these comments on the subject of sati being aware of the rupa that was experienced in the previous sense-door process-- --- srnsk@a... wrote: > Object of mano-dvara vithi is, as Sarah mention, characteristic > of object of sense-door(panca-dvara) vithi which > just has fallen away. (we still call it > present b/c it just fallen away,( paccupan-santati)) At that point > object of mano-dvara vithi is still a paramutta object. There was some discussion on this point during the India trip. The explanation given was just as you have said, namely, that although the object has (just) fallen away, its characteristic can still be experienced by the succeeding citta, and thus it is not to be regarded as a mere memory or concept of the object that has just fallen away. The analogy given was that of a drop of water falling on a double layer of thin paper. The underneath sheet of paper experiences the quality of the water in the same way as the top sheet does. If you have any references from the texts on this point, I would be interested to see them. Thanks in advance. Jon 9136 From: Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 8:09am Subject: Friendly Greetings Dear dhamma comrades, I've just joined the dhammastudygroup and would like to send a greeting to all of you. Namaste, Norman :-) 9137 From: Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 11:05am Subject: Re: Rid of impurities... Dear Jonothan, It's good to read everyone's posts, here. As always, yours are thoughtful and full of wisdom. I feel very fortunate that I found this group. It's a treat to read your answers to my confusing questions. Thank you, Alex 9138 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 3:05pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Concepts Thanks for the clarification, Herman. This certainly makes sense to me. I would not say that the state in which one is happy but ignorant is necessarily a state of suffering in itself. I would say it leads to a future state of suffering. I also think it is possible to be suffering but not be fully aware of it, or to interpret it as non-suffering in order to justify one's attachment, as in heroin addiction. As your teeth are falling out and you're losing your job and someone beats you up on the street, you think: 'Man isn't it great to get high?' [This one's not from my own experience, but I was a cigarette smoker and I felt unhappier when I quit than when I smoked, because the pain of attachment was 'revealed' by not satisfying the desire. Yet not smoking, I assume, is the more wholesome state, although I suppose 'not necessarily'.] If these are the kinds of sufferings you are talking about which may be caused, contained in or concurrent with states of pseudo-happiness, then I certainly understand and agree. For the personal circumstances that you described, I cannot help but express sympathy, Herman. Thanks for your message. Best, Robert Ep. ========================== --- hhofman@d... wrote: > Dear Robert, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > The idea that 'suffering' doesn't have to feel bad is a little > tough for me. What > > makes it suffering then? > > As long as there is no craving, aversion and ignorance in whatever > state one is in, then I guess that is a state free of suffering. > Smoking used to feel really good, being in love with my first wife > and being a loving and caring father was all very rewarding and > satisfactory. > > Then you start coughing your lungs up, it turns out your wife has a > few extra-curricular activities, and your baby dies. > > Awareness of suffering does not necessarily arise immediately with > craving, aversion or ignorance. > > This is why I think of the three marks of existence as meta- > qualities, because without insight these are not realities to be > known. > > All the best > > > Herman ======================= 9139 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 3:09pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Concepts Kenneth, Since suffering is a 'state', ie, an 'experience', it is only real to the extent it is experienced as real. It is a subjective sort of category. If a wooden statue gets its leg chopped off, we cannot say that it is suffering. But a person who gets his leg chopped off is suffering. If he is anaesthetized, he may not experience suffering. But when he finds out his leg is gone, he may experience psychological suffering, even though he is still physically anaesthetized. So suffering is a quality of mind, it is an experience. Thus it only exists or doesn't exist depending on whether citta [consciousness] contains it or not. In terms of being permanent or being an object of some kind, you could say it is not 'real'. But in terms of being something that takes place in consciousness, I would say it is 'real' at the time it arises, and non-existent at the time it is not being experienced. I have been thinking lately of what Hui Neng said and how brilliant it is, whether or not one agrees with it, I hasten to add: paraphrase: "One enlightened thought is enough to make one the equal of a Buddha. One deluded thought plummets us down into the depths of hell." There is a lot to contemplate there, within the transitory nature of experience. Robert Ep. ===================================== --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Herman and Robert Ep, > > Is suffering real? Does vedana related type of suffering also real? > Since they are also anatta, where is there a self to experience in a > sense? To me, it is real because of our attachment to the illusory self, > that is why it is real. My understanding is that suffering is not real, > it is real bc the illusory self thought it is real due to our conditioning > of this illusory self. But still we have to treat it *real* for now :). > > > > > > Kind regards > Ken Ong > > > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > --- hhofman@d... wrote: > > > Dear Robert, > > > > > > Thank you for your engaging post. It is a further opportunity to > > > reflect on the Dhamma. > > > > > > When you talk of suffering are you talking about vedana type > > > suffering, which could also include pleasure in it's continuum. > > > > > > Or are you talking about the suffering a la Noble Truth which isn't > > > to do with vedana? > > > > > > If you are talking about the first type of suffering, then I agree > > > with you. Bodily and mental suffering is a reality that can be > > > experienced. And so is bodily and mental pleasure. > > > > > > But I do not think that the Noble Truth of suffering is about vedana. > > > I think it is more along the lines of that if reality is incorrectly > > > grasped, when permanence or personality are attributed to phenomena, > > > then this is suffering regardless of whether it feels good or bad. > > > And when there is the correct grasping of reality, if only for a > > > split second, then that moment is free of suffering, regardless of > > > whether it feels good or bad. > > > > > > When reality is incorrectly grasped then a concept is formed. A > > > concept is not real, it can be the object of the mind only. But these > > > objects of mind can feed on themselves, and as we all know it is > > > entirely possible to live within this illusory realm for days, years, > > > millenia on end. This mistaking the illusion for reality is > > > suffering. And again, this suffering can feel very good. That's why > > > it just goes on and on. > > > > > > I still wouldn't call Dukkha real, it is more of a meta-quality. And > > > in a moment of awareness it is not there. > > > > Dear Herman, > > Well, I don't want to be too surprising, but I like this view very much, > > and > > appreciate your very wise description of the connection of suffering and > > delusion. > > I have been lucky in my life to have a few moments here and there where > > it seemed > > that the world was laid out as it is and there was no sense of having a > > concept. > > Just direct perception. These moments never lasted very long, but I > > would have to > > call them 'bliss', not because there was any intense sensation of > > pleasure or > > anything like that, but because everything was simply itself. So I > > agree that a > > single moment of awareness dispels concept and delusion. > > > > I once complained to my teacher at the time that these experiences > > seemed very > > profound but always went away. He said they were good signs, but > > shouldn't be > > held onto. Obviously, there were plenty of tendencies at play that > > would remove > > this perspective and throw me back into a deluded state, even while I > > watched. > > Well the sense of the I-watching was not ready to get put away. > > > > The idea that 'suffering' doesn't have to feel bad is a little tough for > > me. What > > makes it suffering then? i would say delusion can feel great but really > > be not so > > great, and I would understand if you said this would lead to more > > suffering, but > > if there is no suffering experienced, where is the suffering at that > > moment? > > > > Other than this question, I greatly appreciate your wise comments. > > > > Robert Ep. 9140 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Nov 5, 2001 3:17pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa Dear Jon, Is there a particular area in the commentaries that is translated, that shows how the scheme you have explained below is derived from the Suttas on the 4 Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path? I would like to see how this interpretation of the Path was conceived. Also, is there a part of the commentaries that explains the discovery of one citta arising at a time and passing on its attributes to the next citta, based on a particular aspect of parts of the Suttas? I would like to understand from where this was derived as well by the Arahats that composed the commentaries. Thanks, Robert Ep. ======================= --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Ken O > > My apologies for taking so long to get back to you on this post. > > (Ken and all: If there are other posts or issues from before or during > the India trip that I have not replied to, please feel free to send a > reminder -- on or off-list -- as I have lost track of where I got to.) > > --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > This reference that you have quoted, > > VII, 38 > > "The noble truth of the way to the cessation of suffering is the Noble > > Eightfold Path. In the teaching of the four truths, this is the > > collection of eight cetasikas corresponding to the eight path factors > > arisen in the cittas of the four supramundane paths. > > It should be noted that while in the section on the requisites of > > enlightenment, the eight path factors may be either mundane or > > supramundane, in the teaching of the Four Noble Truths they are > > exclusively supramundane." > > > > Could you kindly comment why is the Four Noble Truths are exclusively > > supramundane. My confusion is that the Four Noble Truths is exclusively > > supramundane, how is it going to be supramundane if the eight path > > factors which is part of the Four Noble Truth could be mundane. > > Furthermore if it is supramundane, how are we going to learn or practise > > using mundane effort or understanding. > > This is a somewhat technical area, and I apologise in advance for the > technical nature of the answer. I will try to keep it as brief as > possible. > > What the passage is saying, I think, is that references in the suttas to > the Noble Eightfold Path will have slightly different meanings depending > on the context-- > > -- When the Noble Eightfold Path is given as the 4th of the Four Noble > Truths, it always refers to the supramundane path, ie. a moment of path > consciousness (magga citta). This is because, as I understand it, only at > a moment of path consciousness are the Four Noble Truths fully realised. > The 3rd and 4th Noble Truths in particular (nibbana and the path leading > to it) are truths about the supramundane and are incapable of realisation > at any other level. At such path moments, all 8 factors of the Noble > Eightfold Path co-arise. > > -- When the Noble Eightfold Path is given as 8 factors among the 37 > factors of enlightenment (bodhipakkhiyadhamma) it will be referring to the > mundane path or to both the mundane path and the supramundane path. The > mundane path is a moment of satipatthana arising with panna which > understands the characteristic of the reality that is the object of > awareness at that moment. At such moments, 5 of the 8 path factors arise > and accompany the moment of consciousness. These 5 factors are -- > > samma ditthi (right view), ie. the mental factor that is panna cetasika > samma sankappa (right thought), ie. the mental factor that is vitakka > cetasika > samma vayama (right effort), ie. the mental factor that is viriya cetasika > samma sati (right mindfulness), ie. the mental factor that is sati > cetasika > samma samadhi (right samadhi), ie. the mental factor that is ekaggata > cetasika > > In brief, any reference to the realisation of the 4 Noble Truths is a > reference to a moment of path consciousness (the supramundane), while a > reference to the factors of enlightenment (bodhipakkhiyadhamma) includes a > reference to those who are developing the path but have not yet attained > enlightenment. > > I hope this helps clarify your question. > > Jon > 9141 From: Sarah Date: Tue Nov 6, 2001 3:46am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] cittas- sequential and sati Dear Ken O, Sarah: >.....The only other answer I may add is that they must be exactly this > way and cannot be any other way because of the complex way conditions > (paccaya) cause them to be like this. So the citta now arises sequentially > because of anantara paccaya which means it is conditioned by the > preceeding citta to arise sequentially and so many, many other conditions > to make it be this citta and no other citta arising. .................... > k: I was thinking why can't we have many simultanoues arising and falling > of cittas. Why would one have to fall before another arise? This is maybe > of our way of thinking due to science that brain works in parallel rather > than sequential. Would you like to quote a few commentaries or notes or > links that help us understand more on this sequential process. .................... Sarah: I’d like to give some links, but most of the detail in this area that I have is in texts that are not on-line as yet, so I’ll try to quote selectively (i.e choose the shorter ones;-) Why can’t there be seeing and hearing at the same time? Why do cittas (consciusness) arise as they do? I think these questions are the imponderables and that it is better to understand that this is the way it is (because of all those conditions). One of the most useful commentaries is the Atthasalini (The Expositor), available from PTS. It’s not a big book and much easier to read, I think, than the English translation of Dhammasangani (1st book of the Abhidhamma)which it accompanies. The following quote is from Atth (63): ‘....... is termed ‘consciousness’ , because it arranges itself in a series (‘cintoti’, or, its own series or continuity) by way of apperception in a process of thought. And the resultant is also termed ‘consciousness’ because it is accumulated (cito) by kamma and corruptions. Moreover, all (four classes) are termed ‘consciousness’ because they are variegated (citra) acording to circumstance. The meaning of consciousness may also be understood from its capacity of producing a variety of diversity of effects. Herein consciousness with lust is one thing, that with hate is another..........’ This one comes a little later from the same text at (112). Again citta is being described: ‘.....As to its characteristic, etc., cognizing object is its characteristic, forerunning is its function, connecting is its manifestation, a mental and material organism is its proximate cause. There is no such thing as consciousness in the four planes of existence without the characteristic of cognizing. All consciousness has it. But when a ‘door’ is reached at the place where the ‘object’ is evolved, consciousness is the forerunner, the precursor. A visible object seen by the eye is cognized by consciousness etc...an idea known by the mind is cognized by consciousness.............. The consciousness which arises next does so immediately after the preceding consciousness, forming a connected series. Thus it has connection as manifestation...’ ******************** Finally on this question of cittas, let me just refer you also to the Visuddhimagga, which many people have already. At XX30, it describes in detail the 89 kinds of consciousness. At 1V n13, there is a lengthy discussion on bhavanga and other cittas and also a discussion of the treatment of these in the Suttas, Abhidhamma and Commentaries and the ‘inter-connection’. A shorter passage which I’ll quote comes from V11139 addressing the question you’ve raised before about the cessation of cittas: ‘...As to the shortness of the moment; in the ultimate sense the life-moment of living beings is extremely short, being only as much as the occurrence of a single conscious moment. Just as the chariot wheel, when it is rolling, rolls (that is, touches the ground) only on one point of (the circumference of) its tyre, and, when it is at rest, rests only on one point, so too, the life of living beings lasts only for a single conscius moment. When that consciusness has ceased, the being is said to have ceased, according it is said: ‘In a past conscious moment he did live, not he does live, not he will live. In a future conscious moment not he did live. not he does live, he will live. In the present conscious moment not he did live, he does live, not he will live. ‘ “Life, person, pleasure, pain-just these alone Join in one conscious moment that flicks by. Ceased aggregates of those dead or alive Are all alike, gone never to return. No (world is) born if (consciousness is) not produced; when that is present, then it lives; When consciousness dissolves, the world is dead: The highest sense this concept will allow’ ‘(Nd.1.42). This is how death should be recollected as to the shortness of the moment.’ ******************** Thanks Ken, for giving me an opportunity to reflect on these quotes, especially the last one which is always a condition for ‘wise attention’ for me.> .................... Sarah: > > > Yes, sati (awareness) is a mental factor which sometimes accompanies > > citta (consciousness). It accompanies all wholesome (kusala) cittas and > is aware of> the object for those moments only. It can be aware of any > reality, but is not necessarily (read very seldom if at all) at the level > of satipatthana which is aware of a reality as not self. So for example, > if there is generosity or kindness without ever having heard the Buddha’s > teachings, at the moments these mental states arise with the wholesome > cittas, there is sati which is mindful of what is skilful and prevents > that which is unskilful, but not necessarily accompanied by wisdom. > Mindfulness “does not allow the floating away of moral states” (Atth.) .................. > k: Could you give more details on the last quote. Very interesting idea > that I like to ponder on. Secondly since sati only accompany the kusala > citta, so do we need to be aware when we are have kusala cetasikas for eg > metta. Is it due to akusala cittas that might arise due to the falling of > kusala cetasikas that we need to practise sati. .................... Sarah: There are many excellent details about the characteristic of sati (mindfulness) in Atthasalini again (121f): ‘....As the young treasurer of the king, in charge of the tenfold treasure, both early and late causes the king to take note of and remember the royal possession, so mindfulness takes note of, remembers a moral act. Hence the Elder said: ‘As, your majesty, the king’s confidential adviser early and late makes the universal monarch remember: so many, lord, are your elephants, so many horses, so many chariots, so much infantry, so much bullion, so much gold, so much property; let your majesty remember it- even so, your majesty, mindfulness does not allow the floating away of moral states, such as the four applications of mindfulness, the four supreme efforts........... And as that jewel, the confidential adviser of the universal monarch, knowing what is diadvantageous and what is advantageous, removes the disadvantageous and promotes the advantageous, so mindfulness, searching well the courses of advantageous and disadvantageous states;- ‘these are disadvantageous states, misconduct in body’, etc, removes the disadvantageous states, misconduct in body.............It should be regarded as a door-post from being firmly established in the object, and as a door-keeper from guarding the door of the senses.’ Ken, I think I’ve got a bit carried away with the typing of quotes, so I’ll just address the other points in brief with no more quotes;-) To be accurate, sati accompanies all the sobhana cittas which include the kusala cittas, vipaka cittas and kiriya cittas (of the arahat). You can find full details of these in Nina’s books on the websites linked here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/links We’re not aware of anything (as you know) but sati is aware of any reality presenting itself, regardless of whether it is metta, unkindness, wise consideration, aversion, seeing or visible object. Any selection or choice shows there is no sati at that moment. The reason sati (of satipatthana) needs to develop is in order to be mindful of what really is appearing now, not what we’ve always taken to be appearing now. By being aware (with understading) of these realities, it becomes more and more apparent what their characteristics are and what the meaning of anatta is. However, if we don’t hear and consider a lot of details about metta and compassion for example, we’ll think there is awareness of them when really it is attachment or sorrow that is the reality. I’d just like to stress that ‘we’ don’t need to practise anything. Understanding is the key, rather than a wrong idea of ‘self that can do or prctise’. .................... Sarah: > > ...I think it’s most useful to consider what are the > > > realities being experienced at the present moment. By beginning to be > > aware (sati being aware) of a nama or rupa (mental or physical > phenomena) > > now, such as seeing or visible object, feeling or hardness and so on, > this is the way sati develops. Being aware of these different realities, > and understanding the difference between them, is the only way to develop > detachment from the idea of a self or a lasting consciousness. Sati is > very precise and has a very specific function and characteristic. .................... > k: In a sense, only kusala cittas helps to developed panna, then why do > we need to be in sati of akusala cittas as suggeted by Satipatthana. Also > does all these conditioning due to our memory that there is a self. Is > memory a universal cetasikas. .................... Sarah: Panna (rt understanding) and sati need to know and be aware of many, many different realities without any selection. They can then ‘see’ the advantageous and disadvantageous as discussed in the quote I gave. The lack of sati and panna is due to ignorance and wrong view and the lack of ‘guarding’ the sense doors. Sanna, (perception or memory) is one key universal cetasika but I think this post has already become too long ;-) Thanks for your patience and that of others who’ve read through all the quotes. Hope this helps;-) Sarah 9142 From: Sarah Date: Tue Nov 6, 2001 3:59am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Friendly Greetings Hi Norman, --- nymchan0@n... wrote: > Dear dhamma comrades, > > I've just joined the dhammastudygroup and would like to send a > greeting to all of you. > > Namaste, > Norman :-) Glad to see you've 'broken the ice' and hope to hear more from you;-) To others; Norman also lives in Hong Kong and we had a pleasant breakfast and chat on the Peak a week or so ago. I'll let him add any other personal or background details as and if he wishes (or can be encouraged to do so). Norman, how do you find the 'list' here and do you have any comments or questions from 'Buddhism in Daily Life'? This book is also on line at: at: http://www.dhammastudy.com/ but under a different title 'Buddhist Outlook in Daily Life'. Norman, you asked about searching for a particular topic in the archives. Please go to: http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/ password:metta or selected posts have been saved under topics at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts I look forward to continuing our discussions here, so others can join and contribute too;-) See you soon, Sarah 9143 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Nov 6, 2001 5:54am Subject: Re:__[DhammaStudyGroup]_Vipassana Robert Ep This is another one out of the 'oldies' bin. --- Robert Epstein > > > Howard: > > > Nor for me. If "all that there is" is the five khandas, and > > if > > > parinibbana is a final end to these, then parinibbana is an > > annihilation as > > > far as I am concerned, one which would differ not at all from the > > > annihilation of death for a materialist. To me, desire for such a > > nibbana is > > > an instance of craving for annihilation, the mirror image of > > craving for > > > being. > > > -------------------------------------- > > Jon: > > I'm not familiar with the language of the 'isms', but I do wonder if > > you're not confusing a *belief or view* that is not in accordance > > with reality (in this case, that on death at the end of this very > > life there is nothing more, or that there is no result of deeds, > > whatever 'annihilationalism means) with a statement to the effect > > that at nibbana the khandas cease completely. There can be no > > question of any similarity or overlap between the 2, surely >> ----------------------------------- > Rob E: > Dear Jon, > I think what Howard was suggesting was that having a Nibbana that is a > complete > cessation of consciousness [including primary awareness or awakeness] as > a goal > would be a clinging to annihilation, ie, having the kandhas and > associated > experience destroyed. I think he is saying that if that is the actual > description > of Nibbana, then having such a goal represents a craving for non-being, > just as > clinging to samsara represents a craving for existence, or being. Jon: I think we may be on slightly different wave-lengths here, Robert. I understood the discussion to be about the scriptural description of nibbana/parinibbana, rather than a view held about nibbana as 'a goal'. As I understand it, any view of nibbana in the sense of a goal or something one aspires to is bound to be off-track, because we have nothing on which to base an accurate conception of nibbana. However, discussing whether, according to the scriptures, it can be said that the khandas cease on attaining parinibbana does not involve any held view or belief about nibbana; it is an exercise based on one's reading of the texts, with whatever knowledge of the teachings one can bring to bear on the matter. So an understanding, in this sense, that the Buddha was talking about complete cessation of the khandas would in no way run counter to the view of annihilationism (a view that contradicts the law of kamma and vipaka). At least, that's the way I see it… > I have to agree with this. I do not understand total cessation as the > final goal > of the spiritual path. Suffering comes from attachment and desire, not > from > awareness. It is possible to have nothing but kusala cittas if one is a > Buddha. > There is no reason to annihilate awareness in order to be free of > suffering. > Therefore I do not see annihilation of consciousness as a desirable > goal, only > cessation of suffering and attachment. I suppose there are many reasons for having an interest in developing the path. But a view as to a specific final goal of the spiritual path is not essential to seeing the disadvantage in living forever in ignorance and suffering. Indeed, if our interest in the dhamma is based on, for example, a desire for a happy rebirth, or a goal of attaining nibbana as we conceive it to be, then I am inclined to think that understanding the right path could be a very difficult task. Jon 9144 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Nov 6, 2001 5:57am Subject: Re: _[DhammaStudyGroup]_Vipassana Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > And do you agree that that is what the Buddha had to say on the > subject, > > ie, that the khandas cease on parinabbana? > > > > Jon > > > ================================== > With regard to "And do you agree that that is what the Buddha had > to > say on the subject, ie, that the khandas cease on parinabbana?", I would > be > very interested in some references to where the Buddha said that. > > With metta, > Howard I would have to start looking. But I sense from your response, Howard, that you are confident I won't find what I'm looking for (knowing how meticulous you are, and rightly so, about sources)!. So perhaps I should save myself the trouble, and just ask you what your understanding is, from your studies, as to the khandas and parinibbana? Thanks. I will do some research anyway, because I am interested to see what it turns up. Jon 9145 From: Date: Tue Nov 6, 2001 2:17am Subject: Re: _[DhammaStudyGroup]_Vipassana Hi, Jon - In a message dated 11/6/01 8:57:44 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > > Howard > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > > And do you agree that that is what the Buddha had to say on the > > subject, > > > ie, that the khandas cease on parinabbana? > > > > > > Jon > > > > > ================================== > > With regard to "And do you agree that that is what the Buddha had > > to > > say on the subject, ie, that the khandas cease on parinabbana?", I would > > be > > very interested in some references to where the Buddha said that. > > > > With metta, > > Howard > > I would have to start looking. But I sense from your response, Howard, > that you are confident I won't find what I'm looking for (knowing how > meticulous you are, and rightly so, about sources)!. ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: First of all, I'm really not at all meticulous in this. I am the quintessential non-expert! While I would not be surprised to find that a characterization of parinibbana as a final and complete ending of the khandas in every sense does not occur except in the commentaries, I would hope that some discussion of parinibbana can be found in the suttas. I would *like* to read what the Buddha directly said about it in order to better understand his meaning on that subject. I honestly do not know. As I understand it, for an arahant, the khandas, and all dhammas for that matter, have "ceased" in the sense that no separate, independent, self-sufficient dhammas are any longer to be observed. Whether or not, or how, this might change with the death of an arahant I just don't know. I see it as certainly possible that if no association is maintained at that point with any realm of experience, then the death of an arahant does, indeed, result in a radical change; but it would be a change that the arahant would be indifferent to in any case, inasmuch as once full liberation is attained, there is no longer any sense of self or independent dhammas anyway,and there no longer is any grasping at anything, including being and nonbeing. I can *imagine*, however, an arahant *choosing*, based on compassion for sentient beings, to maintain an association with some realm or realms of experience. --------------------------------------------------------------- So perhaps I should> > save myself the trouble, and just ask you what your understanding is, from > your studies, as to the khandas and parinibbana? > > Thanks. I will do some research anyway, because I am interested to see > what it turns up. > > 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) 9146 From: Date: Tue Nov 6, 2001 6:01am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas-(Jon) Hi Jon and everyone, Sorry this mail is not a Pali friendly one. The vithi of manodvara is mentioned in Abhidhammattha-sangaha, in the forth paricheta. Kom just mailed me a Thai version by Aj.Somporn. I checked out online from the main campus library at my univ., there is an English version by Narada Mahathera, Buddhist Publication Society, 1968. I do not know much about history and background of Abhidhammattha-sangaha, beside it's a commentary written about 1500 yrs ago by Ven.Anuruddha. The book has already mentioned some controversies during that time. From my understanding, we can track back the original writing in abhidhamma-pitaka from this book. If someone can tell me more about this commentary and it's origin and background, I would be appreciated. Jon, this is brief summary from the book. I do not even want to say I am parroting, b/c the parrot still has a brain. In Thai we have an idiom, the serving spoon never tastes the flavor of a curry. I, feel like I am a spoon, cannot absorb a flavor from this book. It's pretty complicated. Manodvara-vithi which continues the object (aramana) from 5-sense-door process (panca-dvara-vithi) 1.Atitak-kahana-vithi (atita = past, kahana = grasping or forming) 2.Smuhak-kahana-vithi (smuha = group, mass) 3.Atthak-kahana-vithi (attha = meaning) 4.Namak-kahana-vithi (nama = name) In Eye-door-process, after eye-door-process, (1)Atitak-kahana-vithi occurs alternatively and repeatedly with eye-door-process for numerous times. Then follows by (2)Smuhak-kahana-vithi. It's function is to gather colors together, again occurs repeatedly many times. Then follows by (3)Attak-kahana-vithi, knows the meaning of what has just been seen and finally (4)Namak-kahana-vithi functions as recognition of the name of the objects. (3) & (4) also occur repeatedly many times. To sum. up (1) and (2) have paramattha as aramana, (3) & (4) have pannatti as aramana. There is also another type of manodvara-vithi which does not occur after sense-door-process as well. Well, that's my own rough translation from Thai and my poor Pali. Please check with other sources. Num 9147 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Tue Nov 6, 2001 5:13pm Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Abidhamma books Hi Sarah, Thanks for the explanation and could you kindly provide the English name for the first book of Abidhamma and its commentary. Udana commentary accompanies which book of Abidhamma. I think a list of the seven books and its English translated titles and their commentaries will be very helpful. Visuddhimagga, is the English title known as Path of Liberation or Path of Purity. Kind regards Kenneth Ong 9148 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Nov 6, 2001 10:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Dukkha (was, Concepts) Robert Ep On the subject of dukkha (‘suffering’), you commented in a post to Herman-- ------------------------------------------ I would not say that the state in which one is happy but ignorant is necessarily a state of suffering in itself. I would say it leads to a future state of suffering. I also think it is possible to be suffering but not be fully aware of it, or to interpret it as non-suffering in order to justify one's attachment, as in heroin addiction. ------------------------------------------ and to Kenneth— ------------------------------------------ Since suffering is a 'state', ie, an 'experience', it is only real to the extent it is experienced as real. It is a subjective sort of category. … In terms of being permanent or being an object of some kind, you could say it is not 'real'. But in terms of being something that takes place in consciousness, I would say it is 'real' at the time it arises, and non-existent at the time it is not being experienced. ------------------------------------------ This subject of dukkha is a vast and detailed one, and it will not surprise you to know that, as used in the texts, its meaning has only a limited correlation with the term ‘suffering’ in its conventional meaning (!). Rather than confuse you with my own limited knowledge on the subject, however, I have pasted below copies of the entries from ‘Buddhist Dictionary’ on ‘Dukkha’ and ‘Dukkhataa’. I hope you find these informative and interesting. Jon From Nyanatiloka’s ‘Buddhist Dictionary’ at http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/dic3_d.htm ‘DUKKHA’ (1) 'pain', painful feeling, which may be bodily and mental (s. vedaná). (2) 'Suffering', 'ill'. As the first of the Four Noble Truths and the second of the three characteristics of existence, the term dukkha is not limited to painful experience as under (1), but refers to the unsatisfactory nature and the general insecurity of all conditioned phenomena which, on account of their impermanence, are all liable to suffering, and this includes also pleasurable experience. Hence 'unsatisfactoriness' or 'liability to suffering' would be more adequate renderings, if not for stylistic reasons. Hence the first truth does not deny the existence of pleasurable experience, as is sometimes wrongly assumed. This is illustrated by the following texts: "Seeking satisfaction in the world, monks, I had pursued my way. That satisfaction in the world I found. In so far as satisfaction existed in the world, I have well perceived it by wisdom. Seeking for misery in the world, monks, I had pursued my way. That misery in the world I found. In so far as misery existed in the world, I have well perceived it by wisdom. Seeking for the escape from the world, monks, I had pursued my way. That escape from the world I found. In so far as an escape from the world existed, I have well perceived it by wisdom" -- (A. 111, 101). "If there were no satisfaction to be found in the world, beings would not be attached to the world .... If there were no misery to be found in the world, beings would not be repelled by the world .... If there were no escape from the world, beings could not escape therefrom" -- (A. 111, 102). ‘DUKKHATA’ (abstr. noun fr. dukkha): 'the state of suffering', painfulness, unpleasantness, the unsatisfactoriness of existence. "There are three kinds of suffering: (1) suffering as pain (dukkha-dukkhatá), (2) the suffering inherent in the formations (sankhára-dukkhatá), (3) the suffering in change (viparináma-dukkhatá)" -- (S. XLV, 165; D. 33). (1) is the bodily or mental feeling of pain as actual]y felt. (2) refers to the oppressive nature of all formations of existence (i.e. all conditioned phenomena), due to their continual arising and passing away; this includes also experiences associated with neutral feeling. (3) refers to bodily and mental pleasant feelings, "because they are the cause for the arising of pain when they change" -- (Vis.M. XIV, 34f). 9149 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Tue Nov 6, 2001 10:53pm Subject: A tentative question Dear Sarah, and All, Often, I decide if something is useful or not by seeing the affect it has on myself or on those I trust. From the beginning, though not feeling I was 'up to speed' with other members of this list, I have been impressed by the kindness, knowledge, and willingness to help of the members of DSG. I have wanted to ask this question for a while as I am becoming more interested in learning Abhidhamma, and I needed to ask those I have confidence in to give a blunt opinion. So many people seem to see studying Abidhamma as irrelevant intellectualising, or avoidance of 'real' practice. I have a real sense that I need structure in my learning and practice - I have no contact with Sangha members to teach and give support in practice, and find discouragement always lurking nearby. In this city, I only know some people who follow Vajrayana, and others who meditate on the breath but do not study the Canon. Other places with Sangha on this side of town are immigrant communities who conduct meetings in their own ethnic language. Not that I am a great joiner or in need of ritual. But, it is the fact that my first teacher Patrick gives this warning, that has previously dissuaded me from a more committed study of Realities. " There are any number of ways we can analyse our experience; there are a potentially infinite number of categories we can invent into which we can classify our experiences. What is important is that we remember the difference between category and experience, and avoid becoming lost in the category. Our tendency is to get lost in the categories, and in doing so, lose touch with experience. When we create a system of categories we freeze the process of living experience and create a solid something in which our experience must now conform. We now divide our experience into two basic divisions: those experiences which we can fit into our system of categories, and which is therefore valid, real and useful; and those experiences which we cannot fit into our system of categories. Of course, in the act of meditating, we put more attention to our valid, real and useful experiences than we do to the other type. In brief, we become stuck in attachment and aversion, and instead of investigating our experience, we revert to manipulating it. We take the practice of freedom and turn it into a prison. This is inevitably the case when we project reality into the categories of analysis - whatever system we use - and not into the actual, living, stream of experience. Hence we must treat this system with great caution. We must learn to use it, and not be used by it." Setting aside the phrasing 'we can invent' - (no offense is intended), do you have any comment on the warning conveyed in the quote? Of course I am aware that you would not be studying in this area if you thought it wasn't the correct way to practice, and I am not expecting a surprise answer. :-) But, if anyone would take the time to give me a considered comment on this I would be grateful. metta, Christine 9150 From: Date: Tue Nov 6, 2001 11:19pm Subject: Re: _[DhammaStudyGroup]_Vipassanã Dear Mike, I'm only now responding to a sutta you quoted on the 12th Oct, because I've just come across other translations. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" wrote: > Hi Sarah and Howard, > Sarah, I may be wrong but I think the sutta Howard was > referring to was the Samugatta/Nimitta Sutta at > Anguttara Nikaya III.103. Ven. Thanissaro's > translation is at > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an03-103.html > > I think it will be good if anyone can come up with any > commentarial material on this sutta. Intuitively I > can see how it might support Howard's argument (much > to my chagrin). Howard later mentioned (I think) that he hadn't had this particular sutta in mind but thought it also discussed a `pure' mind, blemished by defilements. (sorry, Howard if this is not a correct paraphrase of your words.) The reason I couldn't find another translation at the time was because as I now see, it is given the reference of 3-103 above, but in both the PTS translation and in Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation, it is given the pali reference of 3-100. Furthermore, Thanissaro Bhikkhu changes the title of both the Pali and English from Samugatta Sutta: Arising-ness to Nimitta Sutta:Themes. BB titles it in English as `The Refinement of the Mind' and Woodward in the PTS translation as `Gold-refiner'. No wonder we are encourged to study the Pali;-) To confuse matters further, while the BB and PTS translations run in parallel and follow the same order (presumably following the Pali order), Thanissaro's order is quite different. It is completely reorganised and maybe this gives a very different emphasis, I don't know and really can't comment further. I don't thin the other translations are on line as yet. Following BB's translation for now,the sutta discusses the different impurities in the gold. First the gross impurities have to be removed and so on down to the minute impurities. Eventually the flaws are finally removed and `whatever ornament the goldsmith now wishes to make of it...the gold can now be used for that purpose'. In the same way, `a monk devoted to the training in the higher mind' abandons first the gross impurities such as `bad conduct of body, speech and mind', then those of a moderate degree, `namely, sensual thoughts, thoughts of ill will, and violent thoughts'. After this, `there are still some subtle impurities that cling to him, namely, thoughts about his relatives, his home country and his reputation' and so on and so on with regard to very fine impurities whilst attaining jhana levels. It goes on to discuss the six abhi~n~naa (super-knowledges) including the 6th which is aasavakkhaya (destruction of the taints).after mastery of the 4th jhana. I think this sutta relates to the discussion there's been on dsg about developing more understanding of more subtle defilements. As some people have mentioned, what was taken as wholesome before is now seen as unwholesome with the development of more understanding. Instead of being cause for sorrow, this should be cause for joy. I don't read or understand any analogy to a pure mind that has been defiled. I just read an analogy to the different layers of defilements which need to be understood and eradicated, step by step. Furthermore, I don't read or understand any suggestion of a `thing-to-do' or a 1st, 2nd , 3rd order. The natural way understanding develops is to know the grosser, more obvious defilements before the very subtle degrees. Again it is descriptive rather than prescriptive. With regard to the `3 Themes' mentioned at the start of T's translation, this part is not included at all in BB's translation and comes at the end of the PTS one. From this translation I understand that just as it's necessary to `blow' on the gold in the crucible, it's also necessary to sprinkle it with water and examine it closely. `In the same way are these 3 characteristics to be attended to from time to time by a monk who is devoted to developing the higher consciousness..his mind becomes pliable, workable, radiant, not stubborn, but perfectly poised for the destruction of the aasavas; and to whatever branch of special knowledge he may direct his mind for the realization thereof, he attains the power personally to realize such, whatever be his range.' (reference to abhi~n~ns, I understand)> Mike, I'm not sure if I've added anything as there aren't any commentary notes. I sincerely hope that B.Bodhi writes a full AN (Gradual Sayings) collection with com. notes like the ones he's done for MN and SN at least. Mike, I know you must be very busy getting ready for your trip to Bangkok. We're thinking of you and wish you good flights with plenty of wise reflection and mindfulness. I'm sure everyone hear will be very interested to hear any comments you care to share about your impressions and discussions after you meet Khun Sujin and friends in Bkk. Best wishes, Sarah 9151 From: Sarah Date: Tue Nov 6, 2001 11:54pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1-Howard Dear Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote> ------------------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > My main question on the following, Sarah, is whether it is based > directly on the suttas involved or on commentaries about those suttas. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ Sarah: The notes I wrote were based on the commentary to the Udana Sutta being discussed. The reason I quoted the Commentary in the first place was because some of us interpreted the Sutta itself in different ways. > > 1. Nibbana was spoken of as a ‘base’, as object condition for the ‘ > > knowledges > > associated with the paths and their fruitions and so on’, just as visible > > objects are the object conditions for eye-consciousness. > > > > 2. Nibbana is discussed as the ‘unconditioned element’ in contrast to > all > > other > > conditioned elements. > > > > 3. Paths and their fruitions (magga and phala cittas) are conditioned > > elements > > which take nibbana, the unconditioned element as object. > > > > 4. Nibbana has ‘its own nature’ which is ‘antithetical to all > formations > > (sankhara). and there is nothing conditioned to be found within it. > > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Certainly, when 'nibbana' refers to the state free of the three > poisons, there is nothing conditioned to be found. > --------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: I understand from the quotes and other readings, that nibbana refers to the unconditioned element free of all conditioned elements, i.e the 5 khandhas. At the 4th stage of enlightenment (that of the arahat), the lokuttara cittas (supramundane consciousness) eradicates all 3 ‘poisons’ completely. > > 5. When describing the nature of nibbana, it is made clear that it does not > > contain the 4 great elements, derived materiality (rupas), the conditioned > > namas (and not even those experienced in the arupa planes which are not > > dependent on rupas). > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Understood, and not questioned. We talk here of the "realm" of no > separate conditions at all. --------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: ;-)) ----------------------------------------------------------------- >> There is of course no ‘who’ but merely> > > moments of consciousness falling away in fast succession as always. > > > > Following these cittas there are bhavanga cittas (as usual) and then mind > > door > > process cittas which review the enlightenment, the magga and phala cittas > > and > > the defilements which have been eradicated (and those still remaining if > > arahatship has not been ‘attained’ yet). Nibbana is also reviewed. > > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Surely as a memory, a conditioned, limited "summing up" (by the > conventional mind) of a glimpse of the undefiled state . > ---------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: Howard, I’m not really sure about this. As I recall (from my studies, and NOT direct experience;-)), the cittas which review the enlightenment and nibbana follow in the process(es) immediately following the process containing the lokuttara cittas (apart from bhavanga cittas) and therefore I would guess that it is the reality (rather than a concept) which is known, but then of course these are not lokuttara cittas themselves....Hopefully, Nina or someone else may add comments. I think you may find it interesting to read Nina’s translation w/footnotes of‘Survey of Paramatha Dhammas’, The Stages of Vipassana: http://www.abhidhamma.org/ I’m pretty sure most these details can be found there. --------------------------------------------------------- > > > Howard: > > > Really! So are you saying, then, that there were moments at which > > the > > > Buddha was without wisdom? > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Sarah; > > Yes. For example whenever vipaka cittas (such as seeing, hearing and so on > > arise). These are never accompanied by wisdom or awareness. Only the 7 > > universal cetasikas arise with all cittas. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Well, this I find very interesting. So we have Abhidhamma seeming to > imply that there were times at which the Buddha was without wisdom. I think > this is likely to come as a surprise to *many* Buddhists, including many > Theravadins! > ------------------------------------------------------------- I’m sure it may (come as a surprise), because *many* Buddhists, including many Theravadins are not really very interested in the fine details. For example, not many people study the difference between kamma and its result and yet this is of great significance in our daily life and practice, I think. ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: > Thanks much for writing, Sarah. It's always a pleasure! > .................................... Sarah: Likewise, Howard. Actually, to be honest, I often let other mails jump the queue because it’s usually pretty challenging finding the ‘right’ words to you, but I see you’ve given me a relatively easy time today;-) Best wishes, Sarah p.s sorry about some of the strange characters which seem to be appearing in my posts - I'm not sure why this is so. 9152 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 0:34am Subject: Nibbana And do you agree that that is what the Buddha had to say on the > subject, > > ie, that the khandas cease on parinabbana? > > > > Jon > > > ================================== > With regard to "And do you agree that that is what the Buddha had > to > say on the subject, ie, that the khandas cease on parinabbana?", I would > be > very interested in some references to where the Buddha said that. > > With metta, > Howard ++++++++++++++++++ Dear Howard and Jon, From the Itivuttaka (no.38 PTS). I use Nyanaponika's translation (wheel 251/253) This was said by the Blessed one, sopken by the holy One , and thus have I heard: there are , o monks, two aspects of Nibbana; the Nibbana element with the groups of existence still remainin (saupadisesa-nibbanadhatu) and the Nibbana-element with no groups remaining (anupadisesa -nibbana dhatu). What is the Nibbana element with groups of existence still remaing? in that case , o monks, a monk is an arahant; he is taint free..but there still remain with him(until death) the five sense organs that have not yet disappeared and through which he still experiences what is pleasant and unpleasant, as well as bodily ease and pain. The extinction of greed, hatred and delusion in him, this is called the nibbana element with the groups of existence still remaining. And what is the Nibbana-element with no groups remaining? In that case a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no longer relished , will even here (at his death) come to extinction. This is called the Nibbana-element with no groups of existence remaining. endquote robert 9153 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 1:06am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] A tentative question Dear Christine, --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > Dear Sarah, and All, > > Often, I decide if something is useful or not by seeing the affect it > has on myself or on those I trust. From the beginning, though not > feeling I was 'up to speed' with other members of this list, I have > been impressed by the kindness, knowledge, and willingness to help > of the members of DSG. It’s always good to hear your kind comments, Christine, but I wonder what you mean by not feeling ‘up to speed’. I sincerely hope dsg doesn’t look like a speed contest (though I must say I find it hard to keep up with Rob Ep and Ken O ;-) Please don’t ever feel rushed, anyway. > I have wanted to ask this question for a while as I am becoming more > interested in learning Abhidhamma, and I needed to ask those I have > confidence in to give a blunt opinion. So many people seem to see > studying Abidhamma as irrelevant intellectualising, or avoidance > of 'real' practice. Yes, I understand and I think there is a trap of ‘irrelevant intellectualising’....Actually to give a ‘blunt opinion’ (and thanks for the confidence), I think there is a ‘meditator trap’ which has the idea that one should just do ‘real’ practice and any talk or discussion or study (ESPECIALLY abhidhamma study) is irrelevant. I also think there is a real ‘Abhidhamma trap’ where someone has the idea that the amount of detail collected and retained is an indication of progress or practice in itself. As I’ve mentioned, my first Buddhist teacher was Munindra, who had spent considerable time with Mahasi Sayadaw and the Mahasi technique was the ‘practice’ which I followed very intently and intensely in India and Sri lanka. Fortunately, Munindra himself also encouraged me to study and question the Teachings. He was one of the kindest people I’ve ever met and i still have the greatest respect and fond memories of him. Still, the meditation was considered the practice, rather than the study and subsequently I met many meditators who had hardly read a sutta, let alone discuss it. Since then, I’ve also met many in the ‘abhidhamma trap’ who think it is essential to study every detail and this is often not reflected or related to daily life or realities at this moment. In other words, the practice lags well behind the theory, .which on its own can be similar to studying any other intellectual subject. Let me just stress right away, that 'my' kilesa (defilements) lead me into one trap after another, even as I write about the dhamma. > I have a real sense that I need structure in my learning and > practice - I have no contact with Sangha members to teach and give > support in practice, and find discouragement always lurking nearby. > In this city, I only know some people who follow Vajrayana, and > others who meditate on the breath but do not study the Canon. Other > places with Sangha on this side of town are immigrant communities > who conduct meetings in their own ethnic language. Not that I am a > great joiner or in need of ritual. I understand. I think my comment so far would be that we don’t have to follow a rule or someone else’s regime. In other words, if you wish to have ritual, fine. If you wish to sit and meditate, fine. If you wish to study in detail, fine. I think the point some of us have been making here is that we all have different interests and inclinations. In the end it’s not the yoga or tai chi I do that counts, or the music Nina plays or the breathing exercises that Rob Ep is interested in. In the end it is the state of mind, now, whether we’re studying abhidhamma, concentrating on breath or beating drums that counts. We can make a structure in our day such as Ihr abhidhamma study, 1hr drum beating or whatever. There’s nothing wrong with this kind of structure and most poeple would say that I’m about as ‘structured’ or organised as it gets. I’m also very aware of how much attachment there is to these structures I have. Whenever my little structure gets ‘messed up’, I feel sorry ;-) So again, while following our inclinations or structures, if there is some understanding and awareness of the attachments, expectations, aversions, along with many other realities, this is more precious than the structure or framework, which after all is only a concept anyway. > But, it is the fact that my first teacher Patrick gives this > warning, that has previously dissuaded me from a more committed study > of Realities. > > " There are any number of ways we can analyse our experience; there > are a potentially infinite number of categories we can invent into > which we can classify our experiences. What is important is that we > remember the difference between category and experience, and avoid > becoming lost in the category. Our tendency is to get lost in the > categories, and in doing so, lose touch with experience. When we > create a system of categories we freeze the process of living > experience and create a solid something in which our experience must > now conform. We now divide our experience into two basic divisions: > those experiences which we can fit into our system of categories, and > which is therefore valid, real and useful; and those experiences > which we cannot fit into our system of categories. Of course, in the > act of meditating, we put more attention to our valid, real and > useful experiences than we do to the other type. In brief, we become > stuck in attachment and aversion, and instead of investigating our > experience, we revert to manipulating it. We take the practice of > freedom and turn it into a prison. This is inevitably the case when > we project reality into the categories of analysis - whatever system > we use - and not into the actual, living, stream of experience. Hence > we must treat this system with great caution. We must learn to use > it, and not be used by it." > > Setting aside the phrasing 'we can invent' - (no offense is > intended), do you have any comment on the warning conveyed in the > quote? Christine, I might not use the same words, but actually I think there is a very good message here. If we take meditate as bhavana (mental development) and understand that the Buddha’s Teachings are not about intellectual exercies and categories and prisons, but about direct understanding or ‘meditation’ at this moment, then I fully agree with the comments. Being aware and understanding directly is the “Middle Way’ indeed. Having said this, if we do not hear, consider and study carefully what objects can be known and study their characteristics in theory and practice, then this ‘meditation’ cannot develop. For example, when some people reflect on compassion, they are overwhelmed with sorrow and think this is a good indication of the development of compassion. If we never read or consider the details of karuna (compassion) we won’t realise that it is in fact dosa (aversion) that is being accumulated and not compassion at all, which of course is never sad. The other point I would stress, and I think this is really at the heart of your ‘quandry’, is that really there is no self at all to determine at what time and on what occasions there will be ‘practice’. If there is an attempt to be aware of a particular object at a particular time, it shows the clinging to self to be a certain way and an idea that it is possible to control. As you’ve rightly mentioned before, it’s not easy at all to give up an idea of self and control. When I was a serious meditator, I was encouraged by teachers and myown wrong views to think I was attaining high levels of insight and indeed I seemed to float around in a permanently calm state. I might still have been floating on Cloud Nine if it weren’t for the help of K.Sujin and Nina who helped me see that there wasn’t even any awareness of seeing and visible object or the difference between them. My practice which I clung to so dearly wasn’t even at Ground Level because it was all undertaken with the idea of self and control. > Of course I am aware that you would not be studying in this > area if you thought it wasn't the correct way to practice, and I am > not expecting a surprise answer. :-) But, if anyone would take the > time to give me a considered comment on this I would be grateful. Christine, I’m not sure I have any idea of a ‘correct way to practice’. I don’t have any idea that studying abhidhamma texts is a time or way to practice anymore than teaching my students. What I am sure about, however, is that the time has to be now, there are realities now, and that it is sati and panna which have to do the work, not ‘I’. I’m also sure that for sati and panna to do their work, the conditions that the Buddha stressed so often are essential, i.e. meeting the ‘right people’, hearing the ‘right thing’, considering and applying. I’m not sure if any of this helps. I really appreciate these questions and comments of yours and am honoured that you addressed them here to me. You seem to have very keen interest and are considering a lot very carefully. There is bound to be plenty of thinking and wondering and doubt in between. However, these are also realities which can be known when they arise. Sometimes it even helps to smile or laugh at these tendencies;-) We’d all like to be told ‘what to do’ or to be given a short-cut. If it were so simple, wouldn’t we all be enlightened by now? I hope to hear back from you and follow this discussion further. I also hope this doesn’t sound like I think I have all the answers which is a long way from the truth. Thanks very much for sharing and I think you'll find that many others are interested in this same question. Sarah 9154 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 1:25am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] By request of Sarah :) Hi Jesse, --- jesse- wrote: > Sarah was kind enough to welcome me to the group and ask a few questions > about me, and I have shared with the level of apprehension I have of the > dharma. I have very little formal instruction in buddhism, in the way of > reading the texts of the tipitaka. Yes, actually I hadn't realised we were writing off-list! I think others would like to hear that you are a young male from Sacramento, US (not quite our youngest member though). The youngest are often the smartest here;-) (Now I'm missing Anders, a young Danish member). >My real learning comes from some > readings and more so their applications in life. I find that these > teachings are like a jewel, and thus the texts that cause one to bring out > these observations are like a diamond in the rough. > She has requested that I share with you a little something I wrote, so here > you are, verbatim. Thanks for this, Jesse. > In this message I am talking about a statement I made > prior about how the quote I have in my signature is very beautiful and has > "many meanings and no meanings" all at once: > > Sarah, > Actually, I sent this thread to you personally. I didn't know if I > should talk about IRC with everyone. :) I'm very glad, as I said that IRC led you here... > What I mean by 'many meanings and no meanings' is this: Consider a man > who is walking, but has no destination. A person who is in motion, but not > going anywhere, equivalent to standing still. Because he is not going > anywhere, but still moving, he can be at all places. He is untangled by so > many things; he is just walking. Just walking. This is the meaning of > 'many meanings and no meanings'. That the quote, and really the dharma, > which is what the Buddha is all about, is like this person walking. When > you understand it, it has innumerable applications; you can find it in > every possible situation. But when you understand it even further, you > discover that it is the only thing which actually has any meaning. > Therefore to say that it has meaning or does not have meaning is useless; > there is nothing else that has meaning. > I'm not very good with words, but this is my understanding of the dharma, > and these are the thoughts which bring beauty out of the dharma, for me. > Hope that was helpful. :) I'm sure you understand in what ways the > Buddha's teachings are beautiful, and how it's difficult to share that > beauty with other people using just words. The good thing with this study > group is that so many people bring their viewpoints together, that together > their posts form a somewhat comprehensive view of buddhism. Well, I appreciate your explanations and I think you have an excellent signature quote. I agree it's useful to consider different viewpoints and hope you find some which are of interest to you too, Jesse. We look forward to your comments and interpretations anytime. > "Subject to decay are all component things; strive earnestly to work out > your own salvation." This will be my 'mantra' or reflection for the evening, thanks. Sarah 9155 From: Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 1:52am Subject: Music Dear Sarah and Nina et al, I just read in Sarah's reply to Christine that Nina plays music, and I am so happy!!!!!!!! I never understood the precept against music, and I was never going to follow it , because as far as I am concerned music and ecstasy are one. When there is music there is no I, just music, and this is the meaning of ecstasy (to stand outside of ). Whether you are playing J.S. Bach or are listening to Bach being played, this is paying wise attention to non-verbal abhidhamma. Sorry, just a bit excited :-) Herman 9156 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 5:58am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Music Hi Herman, --- hhofman@d... wrote: > Dear Sarah and Nina et al, > > I just read in Sarah's reply to Christine that Nina plays music, and > I am so happy!!!!!!!! I know Nina will be glad to read this and she'll be happy to add any details I'm sure. When I used to stay with her, she and her husband would play Bach (I think) on the piano and flute and they've always been real music lovers. She also used to go jogging in the park and cook a lot. I just mention these odd daily life details because so often people have the idea that being serious about the dhamma means foregoing all these pleasures and interests. However, unless one is a monk and following the monk's vinaya, one should live naturally and easily I think. Some time back on the list, Rob K was talking about karaoke and going to movies and how there can be awareness at any time. This led to a long discussion. When I mentioned our hiking trip in Switzerland in the summer, one friend from the list mentioned he was encouraged by it to start hiking again after a long break. I'm glad when I hear this or about your interest and joy in music, because it shows there isn't the kind of 'forcing' or 'suppressing' which can follow so easily with the idea of 'control'. The dhamma and abhidhamma should make our lives easier, not harder;-) A friend living in Bangkok recently was surprised when I told him that when I used to stay with K.Sujin (also a long time back), that she'd spend much of the day shopping with her father, reading newspapers, watching TV, playing scrabble, going out to lunch or helping with the food preparations. In between, she'd look up references in texts and prepare for her dhamma lectures, often interrupted by telephone calls. She's always stressed to me that the study and practice should be very natural without any rules at all. Again it is the understanding rather than the 'appearance' or 'activities' that counts. > I never understood the precept against music, and I was never going > to follow it , because as far as I am concerned music and ecstasy are > one. When there is music there is no I, just music, and this is the > meaning of ecstasy (to stand outside of ). > Whether you are playing J.S. Bach or are listening to Bach being > played, this is paying wise attention to non-verbal abhidhamma. > > Sorry, just a bit excited :-) Well, I'm not a musician so I won't comment further, but hopefully Nina may when she's back into her routine. For sure there are realities while listening to or playing Bach and no reason at all why there can't be wise attention and awareness at these times. I'm excited that you appreciate this Herman :-) I'm also glad I've written something you like or gets your attention....when I was quoting the Atthasalini (The Expositor) to Ken O, I was very aware of pushing the limits in terms of your patience;-) Only one question: how do you fit work, bride, all those boys, dsg and Bach into your day??? "Play On.." Sarah 9157 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 7:02am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Hi All, I remember when I asked Sarah that do we need the organ of eye to see, she say yes. The problem is eye consciouness really gone without eye organ. I could be temporarily blind by venom of a snake and the use of anti venom we could be seeing again. Hence if eye conscious is really gone, we could not be seeing again. Could it be latent in the cittas just like lobha, dosa and moha (cetasiaks), just that the causes and conditions are not there for it to arise as what I always suspect. I believe the characteristics of such sense conscoiuness of one citta is pass to the next time cittas, just like the three poison which we accumulates. It will not cease even when cittas ceased. If these characteristics or function cease with each citta, then it will be impossible to accumulate, panna or cetana or sanna, because each citta will be bring us back to ground zero in accumulations. To me this there is a sense a constant passing of accumulations between cittas. It sounds like a some kind of "self" in these passing of accumulations which will not cease even if cittas cease. For your kind comments please Ken O 9158 From: Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 2:05am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nibbana Hi, Robert - In a message dated 11/7/01 3:37:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > Dear Howard and Jon, > From the Itivuttaka (no.38 PTS). > I use Nyanaponika's translation (wheel 251/253) > This was said by the Blessed one, sopken by the holy One , and > thus have I heard: > there are , o monks, two aspects of Nibbana; the Nibbana element > with the groups of existence still remainin > (saupadisesa-nibbanadhatu) and the Nibbana-element with no > groups remaining (anupadisesa -nibbana dhatu). > What is the Nibbana element with groups of existence still > remaing? in that case , o monks, a monk is an arahant; he is > taint free..but there still remain with him(until death) the > five sense organs that have not yet disappeared and through > which he still experiences what is pleasant and unpleasant, as > well as bodily ease and pain. The extinction of greed, hatred > and delusion in him, this is called the nibbana element with the > groups of existence still remaining. > And what is the Nibbana-element with no groups remaining? In > that case a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no longer > relished , will even here (at his death) come to extinction. > This is called the Nibbana-element with no groups of existence > remaining. endquote > robert > > ============================= Well, that certainly is somewhat clear. But it is said: "In that case a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no longer relished , will even here (at his death) come to extinction. This is called the Nibbana-element with no groups of existence remaining." By itself, it is a minor point that it talks here only of the extinction of the no-longer-relished feelings instead of the extinction of every aspect of the khandhas. However, there is another point that may not be so minor, especially when taken together with the first. There is said, first, the following in talking about the living arahant: "What is the Nibbana element with groups of existence still remaining? in that case , o monks, a monk is an arahant; he is taint free..but there still remain with him(until death) the five sense organs that have not yet disappeared and through which he still experiences what is pleasant and unpleasant, as well as bodily ease and pain. The extinction of greed, hatred and delusion in him, this is called the nibbana element with the groups of existence still remaining." What I find interesting here is that there is discussed only the remaining of the *five* sense organs (until death) and the experience of what is pleasant and unpleasant and of bodily ease and pain coming through them. This pleasantness, unpleasantness, and bodily ease and pain experienced via the five senses constitutes the no-longer-relished feelings extinguished at the death of the arahant. Nowhere is anything said of mental function ceasing upon the death of the arahant. 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) 9159 From: Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 2:11am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Hi, Kenneth - In a message dated 11/7/01 10:08:25 AM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn@y... writes: > The problem is eye consciouness really gone without eye organ. I could be > temporarily blind by venom of a snake and the use of anti venom we could > be seeing again. Hence if eye conscious is really gone, we could not be > seeing again. Could it be latent in the cittas just like lobha, dosa and > moha (cetasiaks), just that the causes and conditions are not there for it > to arise as what I always suspect. > ============================= When an automobile which has been moving brakes to a stop, the motion has ceased. The fact that the car can move again later on doesn't alter that fact. 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) 9160 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 7:52am Subject: Nibbana > > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > In a message dated 11/7/01 3:37:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, > robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > > > Dear Howard and Jon, > > From the Itivuttaka (no.38 PTS). > > I use Nyanaponika's translation (wheel 251/253) > > This was said by the Blessed one, sopken by the holy One , > and > > thus have I heard: > > there are , o monks, two aspects of Nibbana; the Nibbana > element > > with the groups of existence still remainin > > (saupadisesa-nibbanadhatu) and the Nibbana-element with no > > groups remaining (anupadisesa -nibbana dhatu). > > What is the Nibbana element with groups of existence still > > remaing? in that case , o monks, a monk is an arahant; he is > > taint free..but there still remain with him(until death) the > > five sense organs that have not yet disappeared and through > > which he still experiences what is pleasant and unpleasant, > as > > well as bodily ease and pain. The extinction of greed, > hatred > > and delusion in him, this is called the nibbana element with > the > > groups of existence still remaining. > > And what is the Nibbana-element with no groups remaining? In > > that case a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no > longer > > relished , will even here (at his death) come to extinction. > > This is called the Nibbana-element with no groups of > existence > > remaining. endquote > > robert > > > > > ============================= > Well, that certainly is somewhat clear. But it is said: > "In > that case > a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no longer relished > , will > even > here (at his death) come to extinction. This is called the > Nibbana- > element > with no groups of existence remaining." By itself, it is a > minor > point that > it talks here only of the extinction of the no-longer-relished > > feelings > instead of the extinction of every aspect of the khandhas. > However, there is another point that may not be so > minor, > especially > when taken together with the first. There is said, first, the > following in > talking about the living arahant: "What is the Nibbana element > with > groups of > existence still remaining? in that case , o monks, a monk is > an > arahant; he > is taint free..but there still remain with him(until death) > the five > sense > organs that have not yet disappeared and through > which he still experiences what is pleasant and unpleasant, as > well > as bodily > ease and pain. The extinction of greed, hatred and delusion in > him, > this is > called the nibbana element with the groups of existence still > remaining." > What I find interesting here is that there is discussed only > the > remaining of > the *five* sense organs (until death) and the experience of > what is > pleasant > and unpleasant and of bodily ease and pain coming through > them. This > pleasantness, unpleasantness, and bodily ease and pain > experienced > via the > five senses constitutes the no-longer-relished feelings > extinguished > at the > death of the arahant. Nowhere is anything said of mental > function > ceasing > upon the death of the arahant. > > With metta, > Howard >+++++++++++++++ Dear Howard, Here is the definition of these terms by Nyanatiloka in the pali-English dictionary. The 2 aspects of Nibbána are: (1) The full extinction of defilements (kilesa-parinibbána), also called sa-upádi-sesa-nibbána (s. It. 41), i.e. 'Nibbána with the groups of existence still remaining' (s. upádi). This takes place at the attainment of Arahatship, or perfect holiness (s. ariya-puggala). (2) The full extinction of the groups of existence (khandha-parinibbána), also called an-upádi-sesa-nibbána (s. It. 41, A. IV, 118), i.e. 'Nibbána without the groups remaining', in other words, the coming to rest, or rather the 'no-more-continuing' of this physico-mental process of existence. This takes place at the death of the Arahat. - (App.: Nibbána).endquote _____ P427 of the PTS dictionary gives the following section from the dighanikaya atthakatha which I read as saying all khandas are extinguished at parinibbana ""The two kinds are distinguished by Bdhgh at DhA II.163 as follows: "arahatta--pattito patthaya kilesa--vattassa khepitatta sa -- upadi -- sesena, carima -- citta -- nirodhena khandhavattassa khepitatta an--upadi--sesena ca ti dvihi pi parinibbanehi parinibbuta, an--upadano viya padipo apannattika--bhavan gata." endquote I'll try and get an exact translation. robert 9161 From: m. nease Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 10:19am Subject: Re:__[DhammaStudyGroup]_Vipassanã Hi Sarah, Just quickly, I noticed the same peculiarities you mentioned below. Also I think I'm beginning to see a bias in Ven. Thanissaro's translations (toward breath-centrism) if I'm thinking of the right guy--of course I'm no authority, but very good to compare translations. BB's are among the best I think (most rigorous). Yes, off to BKK tomorrow. I'll post from there when possible. Cheers, mn --- sarahdhhk@y... wrote: > > Dear Mike, > > I'm only now responding to a sutta you quoted on the > 12th Oct, > because I've just come across other translations. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" > > wrote: > > Hi Sarah and Howard, > > > Sarah, I may be wrong but I think the sutta Howard > was > > referring to was the Samugatta/Nimitta Sutta at > > Anguttara Nikaya III.103. Ven. Thanissaro's > > translation is at > > > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an03-103.html > > > > I think it will be good if anyone can come up with > any > > commentarial material on this sutta. Intuitively > I > > can see how it might support Howard's argument > (much > > to my chagrin). > > Howard later mentioned (I think) that he hadn't had > this particular > sutta in mind but thought it also discussed a `pure' > mind, > blemished by defilements. (sorry, Howard if this is > not a correct > paraphrase of your words.) > > The reason I couldn't find another translation at > the time was > because as I now see, it is given the reference of > 3-103 above, > but in both the PTS translation and in Bhikkhu > Bodhi's > translation, it is given the pali reference of > 3-100. Furthermore, > Thanissaro Bhikkhu changes the title of both the > Pali and > English from Samugatta Sutta: Arising-ness to > Nimitta > Sutta:Themes. BB titles it in English as `The > Refinement of the > Mind' and Woodward in the PTS translation as > `Gold-refiner'. No > wonder we are encourged to study the Pali;-) To > confuse matters > further, while the BB and PTS translations run in > parallel and > follow the same order (presumably following the Pali > order), > Thanissaro's order is quite different. It is > completely reorganised > and maybe this gives a very different emphasis, I > don't know and > really can't comment further. I don't thin the > other translations > are on line as yet. > > Following BB's translation for now,the sutta > discusses the > different impurities in the gold. First the gross > impurities have to > be removed and so on down to the minute impurities. > Eventually > the flaws are finally removed and `whatever ornament > the > goldsmith now wishes to make of it...the gold can > now be used > for that purpose'. > > In the same way, `a monk devoted to the training in > the higher > mind' abandons first the gross impurities such as > `bad conduct > of body, speech and mind', then those of a moderate > degree, > `namely, sensual thoughts, thoughts of ill will, and > violent > thoughts'. After this, `there are still some subtle > impurities that > cling to him, namely, thoughts about his relatives, > his home > country and his reputation' and so on and so on with > regard to > very fine impurities whilst attaining jhana levels. > It goes on to > discuss the six abhi~n~naa (super-knowledges) > including the > 6th which is aasavakkhaya (destruction of the > taints).after > mastery of the 4th jhana. > > I think this sutta relates to the discussion there's > been on dsg > about developing more understanding of more subtle > defilements. As some people have mentioned, what was > taken > as wholesome before is now seen as unwholesome with > the > development of more understanding. Instead of being > cause for > sorrow, this should be cause for joy. > > I don't read or understand any analogy to a pure > mind that has > been defiled. I just read an analogy to the > different layers of > defilements which need to be understood and > eradicated, step > by step. Furthermore, I don't read or understand any > suggestion > of a `thing-to-do' or a 1st, 2nd , 3rd order. The > natural way > understanding develops is to know the grosser, more > obvious > defilements before the very subtle degrees. Again it > is > descriptive rather than prescriptive. > > With regard to the `3 Themes' mentioned at the start > of T's > translation, this part is not included at all in > BB's translation and > comes at the end of the PTS one. From this > translation I > understand that just as it's necessary to `blow' on > the gold in the > crucible, it's also necessary to sprinkle it with > water and examine > it closely. `In the same way are these 3 > characteristics to be > attended to from time to time by a monk who is > devoted to > developing the higher consciousness..his mind > becomes > pliable, workable, radiant, not stubborn, but > perfectly poised for > the destruction of the aasavas; and to whatever > branch of > special knowledge he may direct his mind for the > realization > thereof, he attains the power personally to realize > such, whatever > be his range.' (reference to abhi~n~ns, > I > understand)> > > Mike, I'm not sure if I've added anything as there > aren't any > commentary notes. I sincerely hope that B.Bodhi > writes a full AN > (Gradual Sayings) collection with com. notes like > the ones he's > done for MN and SN at least. > > Mike, I know you must be very busy getting ready for > your trip to > Bangkok. We're thinking of you and wish you good > flights with > plenty of wise reflection and mindfulness. I'm sure > everyone > hear will be very interested to hear any comments > you care to > share about your impressions and discussions after > you meet > Khun Sujin and friends in Bkk. > > Best wishes, > > Sarah 9162 From: manji Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 11:18am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] A tentative question Christine, Esoteric schools of Buddhism and I am mentioning Mikkyou Schools of Ch'an/Zen in Japan, there is a formula... Thought > Word > Deed. First making thought, making words, then making deeds. This is all right now dhamma. All the words and concepts... The moon reflected in water. Making "looking at moon". Making "looking at water". Making "looking at sound". So that moon in water gives an impression of a reality. Then finally maybe looking at moon, there is recognition of moon. There is recognition of water, there is recognition of sound. This is right now dhamma. Different marks. Different attributes. Sanna recognizes and marks. So the dhamma are marked. It is these marks that are categorized in sutras and abhidhamma. Recogntion of the cetasika as nama. Recognition of doubt, recognition of energy, recognition of sound impinging, recognition of mind-averting-consciousness. So many nama, so many rupa. Sati, mindfulness, is also rising and falling. So this concept learning first is making reflection of dhamma. Then reality recognition. "oh yes, it really is as the holy one has set forth, as if what has been turn upside down has been righted"... many times we are seeing this in sutras. :) No doubt that the dhamma can be experienced right now without abhidhamma, without sutras... that is the only way... because the marks do not change. Even in different languages... Abhidhamma literature and sutras; helping consolidate conventional understanding, conditioning sati, conditioning panna, conditioning the kusala cetasika. The Sutras, Abhidhamma, the Vinaya... The teachings? Spinning the wheel, setting the dhamma wheel into motion. This is right now dhamma, right now spinning, right now turning, the wheel of dhamma. As the spokes of the wheel, rising and falling, so too with nama, so too with rupa. Seeing with attachment, Seeing with aversion, Seeing with ignorance and delusion. Sensing in the mind door with attachment, Sensing in the mind door with aversion, Sensing in the mind door with ignorance and delusion. Right now dhamma... -manji- -----Original Message----- From: Christine Forsyth [mailto:cforsyth@v...] Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 1:53 AM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] A tentative question Dear Sarah, and All, Often, I decide if something is useful or not by seeing the affect it has on myself or on those I trust. From the beginning, though not feeling I was 'up to speed' with other members of this list, I have been impressed by the kindness, knowledge, and willingness to help of the members of DSG. I have wanted to ask this question for a while as I am becoming more interested in learning Abhidhamma, and I needed to ask those I have confidence in to give a blunt opinion. So many people seem to see studying Abidhamma as irrelevant intellectualising, or avoidance of 'real' practice. I have a real sense that I need structure in my learning and practice - I have no contact with Sangha members to teach and give support in practice, and find discouragement always lurking nearby. In this city, I only know some people who follow Vajrayana, and others who meditate on the breath but do not study the Canon. Other places with Sangha on this side of town are immigrant communities who conduct meetings in their own ethnic language. Not that I am a great joiner or in need of ritual. But, it is the fact that my first teacher Patrick gives this warning, that has previously dissuaded me from a more committed study of Realities. " There are any number of ways we can analyse our experience; there are a potentially infinite number of categories we can invent into which we can classify our experiences. What is important is that we remember the difference between category and experience, and avoid becoming lost in the category. Our tendency is to get lost in the categories, and in doing so, lose touch with experience. When we create a system of categories we freeze the process of living experience and create a solid something in which our experience must now conform. We now divide our experience into two basic divisions: those experiences which we can fit into our system of categories, and which is therefore valid, real and useful; and those experiences which we cannot fit into our system of categories. Of course, in the act of meditating, we put more attention to our valid, real and useful experiences than we do to the other type. In brief, we become stuck in attachment and aversion, and instead of investigating our experience, we revert to manipulating it. We take the practice of freedom and turn it into a prison. This is inevitably the case when we project reality into the categories of analysis - whatever system we use - and not into the actual, living, stream of experience. Hence we must treat this system with great caution. We must learn to use it, and not be used by it." Setting aside the phrasing 'we can invent' - (no offense is intended), do you have any comment on the warning conveyed in the quote? Of course I am aware that you would not be studying in this area if you thought it wasn't the correct way to practice, and I am not expecting a surprise answer. :-) But, if anyone would take the time to give me a considered comment on this I would be grateful. metta, Christine 9163 From: manji Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 11:33am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] A tentative question Ahh, after writing, a koan came to mind... maybe this is helping: >From The Gateless Gate. =============== Everyday Life is the Path Joshu asked Nansen: `What is the path?' Nansen said: `Everyday life is the path.' Joshu asked: `Can it be studied?' Nansen said: `If you try to study, you will be far away from it.' Joshu asked: `If I do not study, how can I know it is the path?' Nansen said: `The path does not belong to the perception world, neither does it belong to the nonperception world. Cognition is a delusion and noncognition is senseless. If you want to reach the true path beyond doubt, place yourself in the same freedom as sky. You name it neither good nor not-good.' At these words Joshu was enlightened. Mumon's Comment: Nansen could met Joshu's frozen doubts at once when Joshu asked his questions. I doubt that if Joshu reached the point that Nansen did. He needed thirty more years of study. In spring, hundreds of flowers; in autumn, a harvest moon; In the summer, a refreshing breeze; in winter snow will accompany your. If useless things do not hang in your mind, Any season is a good season for you. ================== -manji- -----Original Message----- From: manji [mailto:manji@s...] Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 2:18 PM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] A tentative question Christine, Esoteric schools of Buddhism and I am mentioning Mikkyou Schools of Ch'an/Zen in Japan, there is a formula... Thought > Word > Deed. First making thought, making words, then making deeds. This is all right now dhamma. All the words and concepts... The moon reflected in water. Making "looking at moon". Making "looking at water". Making "looking at sound". So that moon in water gives an impression of a reality. Then finally maybe looking at moon, there is recognition of moon. There is recognition of water, there is recognition of sound. This is right now dhamma. Different marks. Different attributes. Sanna recognizes and marks. So the dhamma are marked. It is these marks that are categorized in sutras and abhidhamma. Recogntion of the cetasika as nama. Recognition of doubt, recognition of energy, recognition of sound impinging, recognition of mind-averting-consciousness. So many nama, so many rupa. Sati, mindfulness, is also rising and falling. So this concept learning first is making reflection of dhamma. Then reality recognition. "oh yes, it really is as the holy one has set forth, as if what has been turn upside down has been righted"... many times we are seeing this in sutras. :) No doubt that the dhamma can be experienced right now without abhidhamma, without sutras... that is the only way... because the marks do not change. Even in different languages... Abhidhamma literature and sutras; helping consolidate conventional understanding, conditioning sati, conditioning panna, conditioning the kusala cetasika. The Sutras, Abhidhamma, the Vinaya... The teachings? Spinning the wheel, setting the dhamma wheel into motion. This is right now dhamma, right now spinning, right now turning, the wheel of dhamma. As the spokes of the wheel, rising and falling, so too with nama, so too with rupa. Seeing with attachment, Seeing with aversion, Seeing with ignorance and delusion. Sensing in the mind door with attachment, Sensing in the mind door with aversion, Sensing in the mind door with ignorance and delusion. Right now dhamma... -manji- -----Original Message----- From: Christine Forsyth [mailto:cforsyth@v...] Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 1:53 AM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] A tentative question Dear Sarah, and All, Often, I decide if something is useful or not by seeing the affect it has on myself or on those I trust. From the beginning, though not feeling I was 'up to speed' with other members of this list, I have been impressed by the kindness, knowledge, and willingness to help of the members of DSG. I have wanted to ask this question for a while as I am becoming more interested in learning Abhidhamma, and I needed to ask those I have confidence in to give a blunt opinion. So many people seem to see studying Abidhamma as irrelevant intellectualising, or avoidance of 'real' practice. I have a real sense that I need structure in my learning and practice - I have no contact with Sangha members to teach and give support in practice, and find discouragement always lurking nearby. In this city, I only know some people who follow Vajrayana, and others who meditate on the breath but do not study the Canon. Other places with Sangha on this side of town are immigrant communities who conduct meetings in their own ethnic language. Not that I am a great joiner or in need of ritual. But, it is the fact that my first teacher Patrick gives this warning, that has previously dissuaded me from a more committed study of Realities. " There are any number of ways we can analyse our experience; there are a potentially infinite number of categories we can invent into which we can classify our experiences. What is important is that we remember the difference between category and experience, and avoid becoming lost in the category. Our tendency is to get lost in the categories, and in doing so, lose touch with experience. When we create a system of categories we freeze the process of living experience and create a solid something in which our experience must now conform. We now divide our experience into two basic divisions: those experiences which we can fit into our system of categories, and which is therefore valid, real and useful; and those experiences which we cannot fit into our system of categories. Of course, in the act of meditating, we put more attention to our valid, real and useful experiences than we do to the other type. In brief, we become stuck in attachment and aversion, and instead of investigating our experience, we revert to manipulating it. We take the practice of freedom and turn it into a prison. This is inevitably the case when we project reality into the categories of analysis - whatever system we use - and not into the actual, living, stream of experience. Hence we must treat this system with great caution. We must learn to use it, and not be used by it." Setting aside the phrasing 'we can invent' - (no offense is intended), do you have any comment on the warning conveyed in the quote? Of course I am aware that you would not be studying in this area if you thought it wasn't the correct way to practice, and I am not expecting a surprise answer. :-) But, if anyone would take the time to give me a considered comment on this I would be grateful. metta, Christine 9164 From: Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 3:01pm Subject: Re: Music Dear Sarah, I love your ability to express yourself so clearly, gently and profoundly at the same time. I guess I still express myself harshly at times, but I think the bulldozer is shrinking :-) Please accept that there is no malice in anything I write, sometimes I can't resist what seems to be a nice turn of phrase. It is good that anyone can discuss whatever Theradava related topic they want, and that anyone can feel free to join in or not. With regards to all the activities that fill the day, I am reading some stuff re lucid dreaming / awareness during sleep (it seems such a waste to be "out of it" for eight hours every day). Are there any Theradava sources re sleeping with awareness? All the best Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Hi Herman, > > I'm also glad I've written something you like or gets your attention....when I > was quoting the Atthasalini (The Expositor) to Ken O, I was very aware of > pushing the limits in terms of your patience;-) > > Only one question: how do you fit work, bride, all those boys, dsg and Bach > into your day??? "Play On.." > > Sarah > 9165 From: Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 1:50pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nibbana Hi, Robert - What you say at the end certainly shows how Ven. Nyantiloka thought about the matter. But it doesn't really address my question about what the sutta, itself, says. Why is the point I make about it incorrect? With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/7/01 10:54:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > > > > > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, Robert - > > > > In a message dated 11/7/01 3:37:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, > > robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > > > > > > Dear Howard and Jon, > > > From the Itivuttaka (no.38 PTS). > > > I use Nyanaponika's translation (wheel 251/253) > > > This was said by the Blessed one, sopken by the holy One , > > and > > > thus have I heard: > > > there are , o monks, two aspects of Nibbana; the Nibbana > > element > > > with the groups of existence still remainin > > > (saupadisesa-nibbanadhatu) and the Nibbana-element with no > > > groups remaining (anupadisesa -nibbana dhatu). > > > What is the Nibbana element with groups of existence still > > > remaing? in that case , o monks, a monk is an arahant; he is > > > taint free..but there still remain with him(until death) the > > > five sense organs that have not yet disappeared and through > > > which he still experiences what is pleasant and unpleasant, > > as > > > well as bodily ease and pain. The extinction of greed, > > hatred > > > and delusion in him, this is called the nibbana element with > > the > > > groups of existence still remaining. > > > And what is the Nibbana-element with no groups remaining? In > > > that case a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no > > longer > > > relished , will even here (at his death) come to extinction. > > > This is called the Nibbana-element with no groups of > > existence > > > remaining. endquote > > > robert > > > > > > > > ============================= > > Well, that certainly is somewhat clear. But it is said: > > "In > > that case > > a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no longer relished > > , will > > even > > here (at his death) come to extinction. This is called the > > Nibbana- > > element > > with no groups of existence remaining." By itself, it is a > > minor > > point that > > it talks here only of the extinction of the no-longer-relished > > > > feelings > > instead of the extinction of every aspect of the khandhas. > > However, there is another point that may not be so > > minor, > > especially > > when taken together with the first. There is said, first, the > > following in > > talking about the living arahant: "What is the Nibbana element > > with > > groups of > > existence still remaining? in that case , o monks, a monk is > > an > > arahant; he > > is taint free..but there still remain with him(until death) > > the five > > sense > > organs that have not yet disappeared and through > > which he still experiences what is pleasant and unpleasant, as > > well > > as bodily > > ease and pain. The extinction of greed, hatred and delusion in > > him, > > this is > > called the nibbana element with the groups of existence still > > remaining." > > What I find interesting here is that there is discussed only > > the > > remaining of > > the *five* sense organs (until death) and the experience of > > what is > > pleasant > > and unpleasant and of bodily ease and pain coming through > > them. This > > pleasantness, unpleasantness, and bodily ease and pain > > experienced > > via the > > five senses constitutes the no-longer-relished feelings > > extinguished > > at the > > death of the arahant. Nowhere is anything said of mental > > function > > ceasing > > upon the death of the arahant. > > > > With metta, > > Howard > >+++++++++++++++ > > Dear Howard, > Here is the definition of these terms by Nyanatiloka in the > pali-English dictionary. > The 2 aspects of Nibbána are: > > (1) The full extinction of defilements (kilesa-parinibbána), > also called sa-upádi-sesa-nibbána (s. It. 41), i.e. 'Nibbána > with the groups of existence still remaining' (s. upádi). This > takes place at the attainment of Arahatship, or perfect holiness > (s. ariya-puggala). > > (2) The full extinction of the groups of existence > (khandha-parinibbána), also called an-upádi-sesa-nibbána (s. It. > 41, A. IV, 118), i.e. 'Nibbána without the groups remaining', in > other words, the coming to rest, or rather the > 'no-more-continuing' of this physico-mental process of > existence. This takes place at the death of the Arahat. - (App.: > Nibbána).endquote > _____ > P427 of the PTS dictionary gives the following section from the > dighanikaya atthakatha which I read as saying all khandas are > extinguished at parinibbana ""The two kinds are distinguished by > Bdhgh at DhA II.163 as follows: "arahatta--pattito patthaya > kilesa--vattassa khepitatta sa -- upadi -- sesena, carima -- > citta -- nirodhena khandhavattassa khepitatta an--upadi--sesena > ca ti dvihi pi parinibbanehi parinibbuta, an--upadano viya > padipo apannattika--bhavan gata." endquote > I'll try and get an exact translation. > robert > > /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) 9166 From: Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 7:05pm Subject: Re: Nibbana Dear Robert, The following is the definition of parinibbana from the same source. parinibbána: 'full Nibbána', is a synonym for Nibbána; this term, therefore, does not refer exclusively to the extinction of the 5 groups of existence at the death of the Holy One, though often applied to it. Cf. nibbána. This seems to contradict some of the previous discussions (not yours) All the best Herman > > Dear Howard, > Here is the definition of these terms by Nyanatiloka in the > pali-English dictionary. > The 2 aspects of Nibbána are: > > (1) The full extinction of defilements (kilesa-parinibbána), > also called sa-upádi-sesa-nibbána (s. It. 41), i.e. 'Nibbána > with the groups of existence still remaining' (s. upádi). This > takes place at the attainment of Arahatship, or perfect holiness > (s. ariya-puggala). > > (2) The full extinction of the groups of existence > (khandha-parinibbána), also called an-upádi-sesa-nibbána (s. It. > 41, A. IV, 118), i.e. 'Nibbána without the groups remaining', in > other words, the coming to rest, or rather the > 'no-more-continuing' of this physico-mental process of > existence. This takes place at the death of the Arahat. - (App.: > Nibbána).endquote > _____ > P427 of the PTS dictionary gives the following section from the > dighanikaya atthakatha which I read as saying all khandas are > extinguished at parinibbana ""The two kinds are distinguished by > Bdhgh at DhA II.163 as follows: "arahatta--pattito patthaya > kilesa--vattassa khepitatta sa -- upadi -- sesena, carima -- > citta -- nirodhena khandhavattassa khepitatta an--upadi--sesena > ca ti dvihi pi parinibbanehi parinibbuta, an--upadano viya > padipo apannattika--bhavan gata." endquote > I'll try and get an exact translation. > robert > > > 9167 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 7:06pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Hi Howard, But the problem is the engine starts again when conditions permit. I was wondering the other day abt supramundane citta. Since the Abidhamma has such difference, where can't there be Nibbana citta or unconditional citta in Nibbana. My basis is that there is a sense of continuity in accumulations of panna amidst the instanteous rise and cease of cittas. These accumulation has help to add supramundane cittas. So I was thinking, why can't this panna accumulation change this supramundane cittas to Nibbana citta. Its like what Robert Ep says abt transform within. In that sense the cittas totally ceases from its original form of conditioning to unconditioning. It like caterpillar changes to a butterfly. Kind regards Kenneth ong --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Kenneth - > > In a message dated 11/7/01 10:08:25 AM Eastern Standard Time, > ashkenn@y... writes: > > > > The problem is eye consciouness really gone without eye organ. I could > be > > temporarily blind by venom of a snake and the use of anti venom we > could > > be seeing again. Hence if eye conscious is really gone, we could not > be > > seeing again. Could it be latent in the cittas just like lobha, dosa > and > > moha (cetasiaks), just that the causes and conditions are not there > for it > > to arise as what I always suspect. > > > ============================= > When an automobile which has been moving brakes to a stop, the > motion > has ceased. The fact that the car can move again later on doesn't alter > that > fact. > > 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) 9168 From: manji Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 7:47pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nibbana ... Question... Has Nibbana anywhere been described as markless? -manji- 9169 From: Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 8:11pm Subject: Re: Nibbana -- Dear Herman, Yes, that is right. Somtimes parinibbana is divided into two: kilesa parinibbana (cessation of kilesa)and khanda parinibbana (cessation of the khandas) . As a convention, and shorthand way of writing, many authors use parinibbana to refer solely to the latter, whereas nibbana refers most often to the former and to earlier stages on the path. best wishes robert - In dhammastudygroup@y..., hhofman@d... wrote: > Dear Robert, > > The following is the definition of parinibbana from the same source. > > parinibbána: 'full Nibbána', is a synonym for Nibbána; this term, > therefore, does not refer exclusively to the extinction of the 5 > groups of existence at the death of the Holy One, though often > applied to it. Cf. nibbána. > > This seems to contradict some of the previous discussions (not yours) > > All the best > > > Herman > > > > > Dear Howard, > > Here is the definition of these terms by Nyanatiloka in the > > pali-English dictionary. > > The 2 aspects of Nibbána are: > > > > (1) The full extinction of defilements (kilesa-parinibbána), > > also called sa-upádi-sesa-nibbána (s. It. 41), i.e. 'Nibbána > > with the groups of existence still remaining' (s. upádi). This > > takes place at the attainment of Arahatship, or perfect holiness > > (s. ariya-puggala). > > > > (2) The full extinction of the groups of existence > > (khandha-parinibbána), also called an-upádi-sesa-nibbána (s. It. > > 41, A. IV, 118), i.e. 'Nibbána without the groups remaining', in > > other words, the coming to rest, or rather the > > 'no-more-continuing' of this physico-mental process of > > existence. This takes place at the death of the Arahat. - (App.: > > Nibbána).endquote > > _____ > > P427 of the PTS dictionary gives the following section from the > > dighanikaya atthakatha which I read as saying all khandas are > > extinguished at parinibbana ""The two kinds are distinguished by > > Bdhgh at DhA II.163 as follows: "arahatta--pattito patthaya > > kilesa--vattassa khepitatta sa -- upadi -- sesena, carima -- > > citta -- nirodhena khandhavattassa khepitatta an--upadi--sesena > > ca ti dvihi pi parinibbanehi parinibbuta, an--upadano viya > > padipo apannattika--bhavan gata." endquote > > I'll try and get an exact translation. > > robert 9170 From: Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 10:42pm Subject: Re: Nibbana --- Dear Howard, I'll try to get hold of the pali to the sutta and if I do we might be able to study it more. I didn't want to comment directly until I do. I also wondered if you concurred with the definition given by Nyanatiloka; I understand him to be representing the Theravada correctly here. best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > What you say at the end certainly shows how Ven. Nyantiloka thought > about the matter. But it doesn't really address my question about what the > sutta, itself, says. Why is the point I make about it incorrect? > > With metta, > Howard > > In a message dated 11/7/01 10:54:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, > robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > > > > > > > > > > > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > > Hi, Robert - > > > > > > In a message dated 11/7/01 3:37:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, > > > robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Howard and Jon, > > > > From the Itivuttaka (no.38 PTS). > > > > I use Nyanaponika's translation (wheel 251/253) > > > > This was said by the Blessed one, sopken by the holy One , > > > and > > > > thus have I heard: > > > > there are , o monks, two aspects of Nibbana; the Nibbana > > > element > > > > with the groups of existence still remainin > > > > (saupadisesa-nibbanadhatu) and the Nibbana-element with no > > > > groups remaining (anupadisesa -nibbana dhatu). > > > > What is the Nibbana element with groups of existence still > > > > remaing? in that case , o monks, a monk is an arahant; he is > > > > taint free..but there still remain with him(until death) the > > > > five sense organs that have not yet disappeared and through > > > > which he still experiences what is pleasant and unpleasant, > > > as > > > > well as bodily ease and pain. The extinction of greed, > > > hatred > > > > and delusion in him, this is called the nibbana element with > > > the > > > > groups of existence still remaining. > > > > And what is the Nibbana-element with no groups remaining? In > > > > that case a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no > > > longer > > > > relished , will even here (at his death) come to extinction. > > > > This is called the Nibbana-element with no groups of > > > existence > > > > remaining. endquote > > > > robert > > > > > > > > > > > ============================= > > > Well, that certainly is somewhat clear. But it is said: > > > "In > > > that case > > > a monk is an arahant..in him those feelings no longer relished > > > , will > > > even > > > here (at his death) come to extinction. This is called the > > > Nibbana- > > > element > > > with no groups of existence remaining." By itself, it is a > > > minor > > > point that > > > it talks here only of the extinction of the no-longer-relished > > > > > > feelings > > > instead of the extinction of every aspect of the khandhas. > > > However, there is another point that may not be so > > > minor, > > > especially > > > when taken together with the first. There is said, first, the > > > following in > > > talking about the living arahant: "What is the Nibbana element > > > with > > > groups of > > > existence still remaining? in that case , o monks, a monk is > > > an > > > arahant; he > > > is taint free..but there still remain with him(until death) > > > the five > > > sense > > > organs that have not yet disappeared and through > > > which he still experiences what is pleasant and unpleasant, as > > > well > > > as bodily > > > ease and pain. The extinction of greed, hatred and delusion in > > > him, > > > this is > > > called the nibbana element with the groups of existence still > > > remaining." > > > What I find interesting here is that there is discussed only > > > the > > > remaining of > > > the *five* sense organs (until death) and the experience of > > > what is > > > pleasant > > > and unpleasant and of bodily ease and pain coming through > > > them. This > > > pleasantness, unpleasantness, and bodily ease and pain > > > experienced > > > via the > > > five senses constitutes the no-longer-relished feelings > > > extinguished > > > at the > > > death of the arahant. Nowhere is anything said of mental > > > function > > > ceasing > > > upon the death of the arahant. > > > > > > With metta, > > > Howard > > >+++++++++++++++ > > > > Dear Howard, > > Here is the definition of these terms by Nyanatiloka in the > > pali-English dictionary. > > The 2 aspects of Nibbána are: > > > > (1) The full extinction of defilements (kilesa-parinibbána), > > also called sa-upádi-sesa-nibbána (s. It. 41), i.e. 'Nibbána > > with the groups of existence still remaining' (s. upádi). This > > takes place at the attainment of Arahatship, or perfect holiness > > (s. ariya-puggala). > > > > (2) The full extinction of the groups of existence > > (khandha-parinibbána), also called an-upádi-sesa-nibbána (s. It. > > 41, A. IV, 118), i.e. 'Nibbána without the groups remaining', in > > other words, the coming to rest, or rather the > > 'no-more-continuing' of this physico-mental process of > > existence. This takes place at the death of the Arahat. - (App.: > > Nibbána).endquote > > _____ > > P427 of the PTS dictionary gives the following section from the > > dighanikaya atthakatha which I read as saying all khandas are > > extinguished at parinibbana ""The two kinds are distinguished by > > Bdhgh at DhA II.163 as follows: "arahatta--pattito patthaya > > kilesa--vattassa khepitatta sa -- upadi -- sesena, carima -- > > citta -- nirodhena khandhavattassa khepitatta an--upadi--sesena > > ca ti dvihi pi parinibbanehi parinibbuta, an--upadano viya > > padipo apannattika--bhavan gata." endquote > > I'll try and get an exact translation. > > robert > > > > > > > /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) 9171 From: Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 11:49pm Subject: Re: Nibbana ... Question... Hi Manji, This is from Nyanatiloka - manual of Budhist terms vimokkha: 'liberation' (deliverance). I. the 3; II. the 8. I. The 3 liberations are: 1. the conditionless (or signless) liberation (animitta-v.), 2. the desireless liberation (apanihita- v.), 3. the emptiness (or void) liberation (suññatá-v. ). They are also called 'the triple gateway to liberation' (vimokkha-mukha; Vis.M. XXI, 66ff), as they are three different approaches to the paths of holiness. - See visuddhi VI, 8. Cf. Vis XXI, 6ff, 121ff; Pts.M. II. Vimokkha-Kathá. Signless, markless is it what you are looking for ? Regards Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "manji" wrote: > Has Nibbana anywhere been described as markless? > > -manji- 9172 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Nov 7, 2001 11:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Hi all, a. When I read that Vedana feels, I am wondering does vedana really feel or it is the citta that cognize the feel. To me Vedana may be just like a filter or a prism that separate light into seven parts, but it does not feel. To me since citta played the role of knowing I tend to believe that citta is the one that know the feel and not cetasikas. Comment please. b. Similiarly, the function of citta, does citta really experience or it is just doing its job and say this is interpret as good and this is interpret as bad. Comment please. c. Third question, kuasala and akuasala are mutually exclusive and only certain beautiful cetasikas follow kusala and vice versa, please kindly quote any commentaries that say that? I am quite curious and perplex why are they mutually exclusive and why certain cetasikas follow certain cittas. Sorry for now these are my questions abt Abidhamma. If I got more time to read them, i asked more again. Much thanks Ken O 9173 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 0:10am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Hi Howard, I was pondering on the part on citta cease. One explanation I have now is that they cease from their present form. It is like us, dying from this form and obtain a new form. This form has cease. But our consciousness is transferred to the next life. Similarily, to me this "physical" aspect of citta cease but the characteristics, its accumulations of our panna, cetana, sana does not cease, they are pass to the new citta. If these accumulations cease with the "physical" cittas, then we are back to ground zero. There is no point in accumulations of panna if it cease. To me citta could not out of nowhere and know where exactly our last accumulations. It got to pass this information of our accumulation to our next arise "physical" citta. Just guessing here:). Kind regards Kenneth Ong > > When an automobile which has been moving brakes to a stop, the > > motion > > has ceased. The fact that the car can move again later on doesn't > alter > > that > > fact. > > > > 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) > 9174 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 1:17am Subject: Re:__[DhammaStudyGroup]_Bon voyage/Welcome Mike Mike Have a good trip, or welcome to Bangkok, as the case may be. I hope you settle in well, and find good dhamma (I'm sure you will). I look forward to more of your very pertinent comments on the list from Thailand. Jon --- "m. nease" wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > Just quickly, I noticed the same peculiarities you > mentioned below. Also I think I'm beginning to see a > bias in Ven. Thanissaro's translations (toward > breath-centrism) if I'm thinking of the right guy--of > course I'm no authority, but very good to compare > translations. BB's are among the best I think (most > rigorous). > > Yes, off to BKK tomorrow. I'll post from there when > possible. > > Cheers, > > mn > > --- sarahdhhk@y... wrote: > > > > Dear Mike, > > > > I'm only now responding to a sutta you quoted on the > > 12th Oct, > > because I've just come across other translations. > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" > > > > wrote: > > > Hi Sarah and Howard, > > > > > Sarah, I may be wrong but I think the sutta Howard > > was > > > referring to was the Samugatta/Nimitta Sutta at > > > Anguttara Nikaya III.103. Ven. Thanissaro's > > > translation is at > > > > > > > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an03-103.html > > > > > > I think it will be good if anyone can come up with > > any > > > commentarial material on this sutta. Intuitively > > I > > > can see how it might support Howard's argument > > (much > > > to my chagrin). > > > > Howard later mentioned (I think) that he hadn't had > > this particular > > sutta in mind but thought it also discussed a `pure' > > mind, > > blemished by defilements. (sorry, Howard if this is > > not a correct > > paraphrase of your words.) > > > > The reason I couldn't find another translation at > > the time was > > because as I now see, it is given the reference of > > 3-103 above, > > but in both the PTS translation and in Bhikkhu > > Bodhi's > > translation, it is given the pali reference of > > 3-100. Furthermore, > > Thanissaro Bhikkhu changes the title of both the > > Pali and > > English from Samugatta Sutta: Arising-ness to > > Nimitta > > Sutta:Themes. BB titles it in English as `The > > Refinement of the > > Mind' and Woodward in the PTS translation as > > `Gold-refiner'. No > > wonder we are encourged to study the Pali;-) To > > confuse matters > > further, while the BB and PTS translations run in > > parallel and > > follow the same order (presumably following the Pali > > order), > > Thanissaro's order is quite different. It is > > completely reorganised > > and maybe this gives a very different emphasis, I > > don't know and > > really can't comment further. I don't thin the > > other translations > > are on line as yet. > > > > Following BB's translation for now,the sutta > > discusses the > > different impurities in the gold. First the gross > > impurities have to > > be removed and so on down to the minute impurities. > > Eventually > > the flaws are finally removed and `whatever ornament > > the > > goldsmith now wishes to make of it...the gold can > > now be used > > for that purpose'. > > > > In the same way, `a monk devoted to the training in > > the higher > > mind' abandons first the gross impurities such as > > `bad conduct > > of body, speech and mind', then those of a moderate > > degree, > > `namely, sensual thoughts, thoughts of ill will, and > > violent > > thoughts'. After this, `there are still some subtle > > impurities that > > cling to him, namely, thoughts about his relatives, > > his home > > country and his reputation' and so on and so on with > > regard to > > very fine impurities whilst attaining jhana levels. > > It goes on to > > discuss the six abhi~n~naa (super-knowledges) > > including the > > 6th which is aasavakkhaya (destruction of the > > taints).after > > mastery of the 4th jhana. > > > > I think this sutta relates to the discussion there's > > been on dsg > > about developing more understanding of more subtle > > defilements. As some people have mentioned, what was > > taken > > as wholesome before is now seen as unwholesome with > > the > > development of more understanding. Instead of being > > cause for > > sorrow, this should be cause for joy. > > > > I don't read or understand any analogy to a pure > > mind that has > > been defiled. I just read an analogy to the > > different layers of > > defilements which need to be understood and > > eradicated, step > > by step. Furthermore, I don't read or understand any > > suggestion > > of a `thing-to-do' or a 1st, 2nd , 3rd order. The > > natural way > > understanding develops is to know the grosser, more > > obvious > > defilements before the very subtle degrees. Again it > > is > > descriptive rather than prescriptive. > > > > With regard to the `3 Themes' mentioned at the start > > of T's > > translation, this part is not included at all in > > BB's translation and > > comes at the end of the PTS one. From this > > translation I > > understand that just as it's necessary to `blow' on > > the gold in the > > crucible, it's also necessary to sprinkle it with > > water and examine > > it closely. `In the same way are these 3 > > characteristics to be > > attended to from time to time by a monk who is > > devoted to > > developing the higher consciousness..his mind > > becomes > > pliable, workable, radiant, not stubborn, but > > perfectly poised for > > the destruction of the aasavas; and to whatever > > branch of > > special knowledge he may direct his mind for the > > realization > > thereof, he attains the power personally to realize > > such, whatever > > be his range.' (reference to abhi~n~ns, > > I > > understand)> > > > > Mike, I'm not sure if I've added anything as there > > aren't any > > commentary notes. I sincerely hope that B.Bodhi > > writes a full AN > > (Gradual Sayings) collection with com. notes like > > the ones he's > > done for MN and SN at least. > > > > Mike, I know you must be very busy getting ready for > > your trip to > > Bangkok. We're thinking of you and wish you good > > flights with > > plenty of wise reflection and mindfulness. I'm sure > > everyone > > hear will be very interested to hear any comments > > you care to > > share about your impressions and discussions after > > you meet > > Khun Sujin and friends in Bkk. > > > > Best wishes, > > > > Sarah 9175 From: Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 1:33am Subject: Re: Seeing Dear Ken O, In between having a new bride, a Brady bunch, working, dsg-ing playing and listening to Bach and trying to get less sleep, I also wrote a little poem :-) Even as the eye does not see the eye even as the ear does not hear the ear even as the nose does not smell the nose so does the mind not know the mind Probably doesn't help at all :-) All the best Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi all, > > a. When I read that Vedana feels, I am wondering does vedana really feel > or it is the citta that cognize the feel. To me Vedana may be just like a > filter or a prism that separate light into seven parts, but it does not > feel. To me since citta played the role of knowing I tend to believe that > citta is the one that know the feel and not cetasikas. Comment please. > > b. Similiarly, the function of citta, does citta really experience or it > is just doing its job and say this is interpret as good and this is > interpret as bad. Comment please. > > c. Third question, kuasala and akuasala are mutually exclusive and only > certain beautiful cetasikas follow kusala and vice versa, please kindly > quote any commentaries that say that? I am quite curious and perplex why > are they mutually exclusive and why certain cetasikas follow certain > cittas. > > > Sorry for now these are my questions abt Abidhamma. If I got more time to > read them, i asked more again. > > > Much thanks > Ken O > > > 9176 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 4:48am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Horses and medicine [Erik] Ken O > To Jon > Since all views are conventional, hence all our effort are conventional > which implies that our effort will never be Right effort as long as we > do > not realise paramattha sacca. That is why the Eight Noble path can be > mundane and Supramundane. Good issues to raise, Ken. However, we should not equate ‘effort of the mundane path’ with ‘conventional effort’. Conventional effort in and of itself doesn’t lead to anything, since it doesn’t necessarily connote kusala of the level of satipatthana, or kusala of any level for that matter. Effort of the mundane path (ie.‘right effort’ of the mundane level) is actually the mental factor effort that arises with a moment of satipatthana. Likewise, right view of the mundane level is the panna cetasika that arises with a moment of satipatthana. As to the difference between the mundane and the supramundane, the Visuddhimagga notes (XXIII, 2)-- "Herein, it should be understood that one of the benefits of the mundane development of understanding is the removal of the various defilements beginning with [mistaken] view of individuality. This starts with the delimitation of mentality-materiality. Then one of the benefits of the supramundane development of understanding is the removal, at the path moment, of the various defilements beginning with the fetters." Jon 9177 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 5:04am Subject: Re: A tentative question Manji, Thank you for your reply about 'right now dhamma. The phrase is a concise reminder to stick on the front of the diary I carry everywhere each day. :) So......discovering 'ultimate Truth' does not come from collecting more data - i.e. reading, studying, discussing....the reflection of the moon. It comes from a clear, awake, dispassionate mind.......... In looking into the story you quoted from the Gateless Gate, I discovered a paragraph from Charlotte Joko Beck that resonated - "Intelligent practice always deals with just one thing: the fear at the base of human existence, the fear that 'I am not'. And of course I am not, but the last thing I want to know is that. I am impermanence itself in a rapidly changing human form that appears solid. I fear to see what I am: an everchanging energy field. I don't want to be that. So good practice is about fear. Fear takes the form of constantly thinking, speculating, analysing, fantasising. With all that activity we create a cloud cover to keep ourselves safe in make-believe practice. True practice is 'not' safe; it's anything but safe. But we don't like that, so we obsess with out feverish efforts to achieve our version of the personal dream. Such obsessing practice is itself just another cloud between ourselves and reality. The only thing that matters is seeing with an impersonal searchlight: seeing things as they are. When the personal barrier drops away, why do we have to call it anything? We just live our lives. And when we die, we just die. No problem anywhere." metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "manji" wrote: > Christine, > > Esoteric schools of Buddhism and I am mentioning Mikkyou Schools of > Ch'an/Zen in Japan, there is a formula... Thought > Word > Deed. > > First making thought, making words, then making deeds. > > This is all right now dhamma. All the words and concepts... The moon > reflected in water. Making "looking at moon". Making "looking at water". > Making "looking at sound". So that moon in water gives an impression of > a reality. > > Then finally maybe looking at moon, there is recognition of moon. There > is recognition of water, there is recognition of sound. > > This is right now dhamma. Different marks. Different attributes. Sanna > recognizes and marks. So the dhamma are marked. > > It is these marks that are categorized in sutras and abhidhamma. > Recogntion of the cetasika as nama. Recognition of doubt, recognition of > energy, recognition of sound impinging, recognition of > mind-averting-consciousness. > > So many nama, so many rupa. Sati, mindfulness, is also rising and > falling. > > So this concept learning first is making reflection of dhamma. Then > reality recognition. "oh yes, it really is as the holy one has set > forth, as if what has been turn upside down has been righted"... many > times we are seeing this in sutras. :) > > No doubt that the dhamma can be experienced right now without > abhidhamma, without sutras... that is the only way... because the marks > do not change. Even in different languages... Abhidhamma literature and > sutras; helping consolidate conventional understanding, conditioning > sati, conditioning panna, conditioning the kusala cetasika. > > The Sutras, Abhidhamma, the Vinaya... The teachings? > Spinning the wheel, setting the dhamma wheel into motion. > > This is right now dhamma, > right now spinning, > right now turning, > the wheel of dhamma. > > As the spokes of the wheel, > rising and falling, > so too with nama, > so too with rupa. > > Seeing with attachment, > Seeing with aversion, > Seeing with ignorance and delusion. > > Sensing in the mind door with attachment, > Sensing in the mind door with aversion, > Sensing in the mind door with ignorance and delusion. > > Right now dhamma... > -manji- > 9178 From: Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 0:46am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana Hi, Robert - In a message dated 11/8/01 1:45:02 AM Eastern Standard Time, robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > Dear Howard, > > I'll try to get hold of the pali to the sutta and if I do we might be > able to study it more. I didn't want to comment directly until I do. > I also wondered if you concurred with the definition given by > Nyanatiloka; I understand him to be representing the Theravada > correctly here. > ----------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I concur that he is definitely expressing the standard Theravadin commentarial position here. It is not for me to "agree" with that or not, because I certainly have no basis for evaluating it - I haven't any actual knowledge as to the nature of nibbana, let alone parinibbana. I would be very interested in getting a better understanding, from the tipitaka itself, and mainly the suttas, what the Buddha had to say. However, the one strong prejudice that I *do* have in the matter is that even if parinibbana does mark the complete termination of all the khandhas (which I definitely don't rule out), it is a termination that, in some fashion (and one not likely compatible with ordinary samsaric usage), does not constitute making "the state of the dead arahant" an absolute nullity equivalent to the usual materialist's notion of death. (Of course, in the foregoing, "the state of the dead arahant" is misleading language on several counts.) The sutta we were discussing *might* seem to suggest the following: (1) The living arahant already sees only anatta in "his/her self" and in all dhammas, and he/she neither grasps at or pushes away anything, is attached to nothing, seeing nothing anywhere as substantial or personal or truly satisfactory, and no longer is (i.e. no longer has the seeming of being) a "being", and (2) upon death, the functions of sight, hearing, touch, taste, and smell, their associated mindstates, and their associated objects no longer arise. (Whether or not, motivated by compassion, these functions can be reacquired is a separate question. Apparently, Theravada says "no"and Mahayana says "yes".) ------------------------------------------------------ > best wishes > robert > ============================ 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) 9179 From: Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 0:53am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Seeing Hi, Kenneth - In a message dated 11/8/01 3:11:35 AM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn@y... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I was pondering on the part on citta cease. One explanation I have now is > that they cease from their present form. It is like us, dying from this > form and obtain a new form. This form has cease. But our consciousness is > transferred to the next life. > > Similarily, to me this "physical" aspect of citta cease but the > characteristics, its accumulations of our panna, cetana, sana does not > cease, they are pass to the new citta. If these accumulations cease with > the "physical" cittas, then we are back to ground zero. There is no point > in accumulations of panna if it cease. To me citta could not out of > nowhere and know where exactly our last accumulations. It got to pass > this information of our accumulation to our next arise "physical" citta. > > > Just guessing here:). > > > > > Kind regards > Kenneth Ong > ============================== I believe you are correct here. Certainly patterns and characteristics are passed on. Moreover, even the notions of arising and cessation are purely conven tional. There is no arising of a real existent from nothing, nor is there ever the annihilation of a real existent. There are, in fact, no real existents at all, no separate, separable, self-existing "things" at all; there is just the seeming of such things. 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) 9180 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 6:02am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Robert Ep --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Good material, Jon. Thanks. And this description of the arising, > duration and > ending of a citta is not so complicated really. Like everything else > within the > space-time continuum, it has a beginning, a middle and an end, which > take place > seemingly in time and in the physical world. This makes the citta > somewhat > accessible as an event, even if it happens too fast and subtly for us to > normally > be aware of it. As far as citta happening 'too fast and subtly for us to normally be aware of it' is concerned, my understanding is, yes and no. When awareness is being developed, it is not aware of an individual citta (I suppose only a Buddha would have that level of understanding), but it can be aware of the *characteristic* of citta. This can be known because awareness can take as its object several moments of, for example, the citta that sees or hears and thus something of the characteristic of that particular citta can be known. The following passage fro the Visuddhimagga (XXIII, 2), which I cited in a post to Ken O a few minutes ago, bears repeating. It says in effect that the beginning of mundane development of understanding is the understanding that knows the difference between nama (ie. citta and cetasika) and rupa-- "Herein, it should be understood that one of the benefits of the mundane development of understanding is the removal of the various defilements beginning with [mistaken] view of individuality. This starts with the delimitation of mentality-materiality." As to the characteristic of citta, the Explanatory Guide in Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation of the Abhidhammattha Sangaha states (CMA I, Guide to #3) "In the case of citta, its characteristic is the knowing of an object (vijaanana). Its function is to be a "forerunner" (pubbangama) of the mental factors in that it presides over them and is always accompanied by them. Its manifestation--the way it appears in the meditator's experience--is as a continuity of processes (sandhaana). Its proximate cause is mind-and-matter (naamaruupa) because consciousness cannot arise alone, in the complete absence of mental factors and material phenomena." Jon 9181 From: Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 6:03am Subject: Re: Nibbana Dear Howard, Thanks for the detailed reply. On your point about khanda parinibbana being different from the materialists idea: absolutely. The texts are at pains to make this very point. The materialist believes that there is a self that arose out of matter and that this self ceases upon death. The Buddhist viewpoint is quite different. The materialist may believe very strongly that when they die this is the end of existence - but that view is at odds with the way things are. While the conditions exist, and the anihilationist view itself is a condition, then there will be conditioned phenomena. best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > ........ However, the one strong > prejudice that I *do* have in the matter is that even if parinibbana does > mark the complete termination of all the khandhas (which I definitely don't > rule out), it is a termination that, in some fashion (and one not likely > compatible with ordinary samsaric usage), does not constitute making "the > state of the dead arahant" an absolute nullity equivalent to the usual > materialist's notion of death. (Of course, in the foregoing, "the state of > the dead arahant" is misleading language on several counts.) ++++++++++++ +++++++++++= > The sutta we were discussing *might* seem to suggest the following: > (1) The living arahant already sees only anatta in "his/her self" and in all > dhammas, and he/she neither grasps at or pushes away anything, is attached to > nothing, seeing nothing anywhere as substantial or personal or truly > satisfactory, and no longer is (i.e. no longer has the seeming of being) a > "being", and (2) upon death, the functions of sight, hearing, touch, taste, > and smell, their associated mindstates, and their associated objects no > longer arise. (Whether or not, motivated by compassion, these functions can > be reacquired is a separate question. Apparently, Theravada says "no"and > Mahayana says "yes".) > ------------------------------------------------------ > > > best wishes > > robert > > > ============================ > 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) 9182 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 6:09am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya IV Ken O You make several points here, and I will try to respond succinctly. The numbers refer to the numbers I have added to your comments below. 1/ Just because something is 'attractive' (ie., not repugnant) does not mean it should be the object of desire, any more than the fact that something that is 'suffering' (the opposite in this context?) need suggest aversion. 2/ I understand the Buddha's explanation to be as follows-- - There is the born (= the conditioned, ie. this existence) - The only escape from the born would be the unborn (= the unconditioned) - The discovery of the unborn (= nibbana) is the discovery that is made by a Buddha - If there were no such unborn, there would not be any escape from the world of the born. There is no suggestion here that nibbana is conditioned by the born, as far as I can see. 3/ I would agree that there is little in the way of description of nibbana in the suttas, and I imagine this is for precisely the reason you suggest, namely, that any description is pretty meaningless to us. In any event, a detailed understanding of such description is not necessary for the development of the path, it seems to me. Would you agree with this last point? 4/ & 5/ I am not sure I see your point here, Ken. The Buddha is affirming the existence of suffering/a path but pointing out the non-existence of any person who suffers/travels the path. You are then saying, if there is no person how can there be any suffering/path in the first place? This seems to be a semantic argument rather than a substantive one. Doesn't it go against your own experience in life? I'm not sure if I have understood your points. Please let me know. Jon --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Jon 1/ > >Thus is Nibbána visible in this life, immediate, inviting, attractive, > >and comprehensible to the wise" (A. III, 55). > > k: hmm attractive? Sounds like desiring to be in Nibbana? 2/ > "Verily, there is an Unborn, Unoriginated, Uncreated, Unformed. If there > were not this Unborn, Unoriginated, Uncreated, Unformed, escape from the > world of the born, the originated, the created, the formed, would not be > possible" (Ud. VIII, 3). > > k: I think when we are talk abt unborn we should not equate this with > the > born. Born should be equate with death and not unborn. Undeath is > equate > with unborn. It is like if there is no creation in the first place, > where > is there destruction. Furthermore when the commentary talk abt escape > from the world of born, isn't it implying we are going from one "born" > state to another state "where born does not exist". It sounds like > saying > that Nibbana is conditioned by the born, because without the born, where > is there a state "where born does not exist". 3/ > "One cannot too often and too emphatically stress the fact that not only > for the actual realization of the goal of Nibbána, but also for a > theoretical understanding of it, it is an indispensable preliminary > condition to grasp fully the truth of anattá (q.v.), the egolessness and > insubstantiality of all forms of existence. Without such an > understanding, > one will necessarily misconceive Nibbána - according to one's either > materialistic or metaphysical leanings - either as annihilation of an > ego, > or as an eternal state of existence into which an ego or self enters or > with which it merges. Hence it is said:" > > k: So what is the point of explaining Nibbana in the first place. That > is why I think Buddha says very few points in describing Nibbana. A > nature that are beyond words to described. 4/ > >"Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found; > >The deed is, but no doer of the deed is there; > > k: Since there is no sufferer, where is there suffering in the first > place? 5/ > >Nibbána is, but not the man that enters it; > >The path is, but no traveler on it is seen." > >(Vis.M. XVI) > > k: Since there is no traveler, where is there a need for a path to > travel? Path is also anatta, same as the traveler, hence where is the > path? 9183 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 10:07am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Music > --- hhofman@d... wrote: > Dear Sarah and Nina et al, >> >> I just read in Sarah's reply to Christine that Nina plays music, and >> I am so happy!!!!!!!! Sarah: about Khun Sujin: She's always stressed to me that the study and practice should be very natural > without any rules at all. Again it is the understanding rather than the > 'appearance' or 'activities' that counts. > H: I never understood the precept against music, and I was never going >> to follow it , because as far as I am concerned music and ecstasy are >> one. When there is music there is no I, just music, and this is the >> meaning of ecstasy (to stand outside of ). >> Whether you are playing J.S. Bach or are listening to Bach being >> played, this is paying wise attention to non-verbal abhidhamma. Sarah: For sure there are realities while listening > to or playing Bach and no reason at all why there can't be wise attention and > awareness at these times. Dear Hermann, Christine, Sarah and friends, That is an expressive Email, I had to laugh. I had conceit when I read that you pay attention to my music, there it is again: I and you. Conceit plays us many tricks. Playing music is the same as talking, thus, many different kinds of cittas arise and fall away very fast and these condition different rupas. Yes, Abidhamma is life, normal, natural life, even liking music is Abhidhamma. Liking the music, delight, you call it extasy, this is attachment. We do not have to force ourselves to refrain from it, it is normal, natural. But it is good to know it. The monk's lifestyle is different, he should live like the arahat who is without defilements. Therefore, he should not indulge in sense pleasures, such as music. What do you play, and do you teach? First a little more about our music. Lodewijk and I got to know each other through the music, 56 years ago, that must be before you were born? We play music for two pianos, and also recorder and harpsichord. We also play with my nephews, who play cello and also recorder. On Sunday my hundred year old father comes to dinner (a four course dinner) with his very intelligent asylum dog, Oscar (Christine likes this!) and on his request we have to play something. Oscar especially likes Bach or very quiet music and lays down between us. If it is less to his liking he walks up and down. Dogs know so much, Christine. Liking music does not fall from the blue sky, it ihas been accumulated from citta to citta, also from the past. Your five boys are all different, with different likings and talents and this is conditioned, accumulated. It is interesting to observe their different accumulations. Cittas arise and fall away very fast and akusala cittas can arise shortly after kusala cittas. When I am just enjoying music for myself, or when I play for my father and Oscar in order to give them a good time, is there a difference? You can prove such things to yourself. Some time ago you said that you find it difficult to know the difference between kusala and akusala, and that you like to prove everything yourself. That is right. However, learning some details about kusala and akusala from the teachings helps us to consider what is arising in our own life. When we think of our own enjoyment there is some selfishness, even though we do not harm others, it is attachment, and when we think of someone else, of his wellbeing, there is generosity and kindness. We had to play at a funeral ceremony, for my sister in law who recently died. This is a way of showing sympathy to the members of the family. But of course, there is also conceit and attachment. Again, music is just like talking, so many different cittas, and there are many moments of attachment to the sound. Also when we are talking in ordinary speech, there is attachment to my voice, or to the words we are expressing, there is hearing and sound, but mostly we are forgetful of realities. Did we consider hearing while we are talking ourselves, or are we just absorbed in what we are saying? We have accumulated forgetfulness and ignorance for aeons, how can that change immediately? Thus, when there is no dana, generosity, sila, observance of morality or mental development, we talk or play music, we act and think with akusala cittas. You may like to read "Deeds of Merit" by A. Sujin, Amara recently put on her Web, which is also on the Zolag web. Read it and check it for yourself, with regard to your own life. When you consider your own life, and you try to understand it more, it is kusala. There is sati, but it is of the level of considering, not yet direct awareness of characteristics appearing through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body and mind. We should not mind whether direct awareness arises or not yet, if we mind, it shows clinging to self. This works counteractive. It is not too difficult to know what is kusala and akusala in theory, but since many different cittas arise and fall away so quickly and we have so much ignorance and clinging, it is not easy to know exactly when the citta is kusala and when akusala. Through satipatthana realities can be known as they are, but it will take a long time of development, maybe eaons. Never mind, each little bit of understanding is a gain. An example of how we can be tricked: we see the usefulness of generosity, and indeed there can be moments of generosity, but then there can be other cittas which are attached to the idea of: I am generous, self again. But panna should know everything, all that arises in daily life. We hear music, we have to hear, we cannot choose, no self who can select this. Everything occurs already because there are the approriate conditions. I did not make my own earsense, it is being produced by kamma again and again. As Sarah explained, there are realities when playing music, hearing, seeing, knowing the meaning of the notes you read, hardness, like and dislike. Sometimes there can be awareness of a characteristic, but this cannot be forced. Awareness arises when there are conditions for it. Now Lodewijk is playing the piano. With best wishes, also to your family, Nina. 9184 From: manji Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 0:06pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana ... Question... Herman, Not really, but maybe in readings and sitting... and it will come of fruition. So not so much thinking about this, it came in passing. Maybe through reading sutras it will come up.... -manji- -----Original Message----- From: hhofman@d... [mailto:hhofman@d...] Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 2:50 AM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana ... Question... Hi Manji, This is from Nyanatiloka - manual of Budhist terms vimokkha: 'liberation' (deliverance). I. the 3; II. the 8. I. The 3 liberations are: 1. the conditionless (or signless) liberation (animitta-v.), 2. the desireless liberation (apanihita- v.), 3. the emptiness (or void) liberation (suññatá-v. ). They are also called 'the triple gateway to liberation' (vimokkha-mukha; Vis.M. XXI, 66ff), as they are three different approaches to the paths of holiness. - See visuddhi VI, 8. Cf. Vis XXI, 6ff, 121ff; Pts.M. II. Vimokkha-Kathá. Signless, markless is it what you are looking for ? Regards Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "manji" wrote: > Has Nibbana anywhere been described as markless? > > -manji- 9185 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 5:00pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya IV Hi Jon I always appreciate your response. --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Ken O > > You make several points here, and I will try to respond succinctly. The > numbers refer to the numbers I have added to your comments below. > > 1/ Just because something is 'attractive' (ie., not repugnant) does > not mean it should be the object of desire, any more than the fact that > something that is 'suffering' (the opposite in this context?) need > suggest aversion. k: I was rather prejudice when the commentary used the word attractive. It has a natural tendency to have a negative connotations in my conditioned mind. I more concern of its negative implications. Bc when we talk abt things being attractive, there is an implication of an underlying attachment to it. > > 2/ I understand the Buddha's explanation to be as follows-- > - There is the born (= the conditioned, ie. this existence) > - The only escape from the born would be the unborn (= the > unconditioned) - The discovery of the unborn (= nibbana) is the discovery that is made > by a Buddha > - If there were no such unborn, there would not be any escape from the > world of the born. > There is no suggestion here that nibbana is conditioned by the born, as > far as I can see. > 3/ > I would agree that there is little in the way of description of nibbana > in the suttas, and I imagine this is for precisely the reason you > suggest, namely, that any description is pretty meaningless to us. In any event, a detailed understanding of such description is not necessary for the development of the path, it seems to me. Would you agree with this last point? k: Yes I agree with you :). > 4/ & 5/ > I am not sure I see your point here, Ken. The Buddha is affirming the > existence of suffering/a path but pointing out the non-existence of any > person who suffers/travels the path. You are then saying, if there is > no person how can there be any suffering/path in the first place? This > seems to be a semantic argument rather than a substantive one. Doesn't it go against your own experience in life? > > I'm not sure if I have understood your points. Please let me know. > > Jon k: When the verse imply that is no sufferer - to me it would imply that we have understand reality. Then where is suffering to be found. On one hand we are talking abt anatta (no sufferer), on the other we are not viewing suffering as anatta (suffering exist). To me this is an incorrect perspective. Both are anatta. Kind regards Kenneth Ong 9186 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 5:24pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Horses and medicine [Erik] Hi Jon For understanding of the Dhamma, we say that this is conventional and that is mundane. To me for real life practise, satipatthana is an application to the conventional life using right view and right understanding as a foundation. There should not be a worry abt mundane and conventional bc it has been merge as one. When such application is arise, there is no worry whether Panna (cetasiak) is arise as right view is already there. It will arise naturally with the moment of satipatthana just like moha will reinforce itself naturally when we enjoy ourselves in the six senses. Yes I agree with Nina that it will take us a long time to understand satipatthana, maybe eons. Every word I type now, there is lobha to these words. Kind regards Ken O --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Ken O > > > To Jon > > Since all views are conventional, hence all our effort are > conventional > > which implies that our effort will never be Right effort as long as we > > do > > not realise paramattha sacca. That is why the Eight Noble path can be > > mundane and Supramundane. > > Good issues to raise, Ken. However, we should not equate ‘effort of the > mundane path’ with ‘conventional effort’. Conventional effort in and of > itself doesn’t lead to anything, since it doesn’t necessarily connote > kusala of the level of satipatthana, or kusala of any level for that > matter. > > Effort of the mundane path (ie.‘right effort’ of the mundane level) is > actually the mental factor effort that arises with a moment of > satipatthana. Likewise, right view of the mundane level is the panna > cetasika that arises with a moment of satipatthana. > > As to the difference between the mundane and the supramundane, the > Visuddhimagga notes (XXIII, 2)-- > "Herein, it should be understood that one of the benefits of the mundane > development of understanding is the removal of the various defilements > beginning with [mistaken] view of individuality. This starts with the > delimitation of mentality-materiality. Then one of the benefits of the > supramundane development of understanding is the removal, at the path > moment, of the various defilements beginning with the fetters." > > Jon > 9187 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 9:15pm Subject: Re:__[DhammaStudyGroup]_Vipassana --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > I suppose there are many reasons for having an interest in developing the > path. But a view as to a specific final goal of the spiritual path is not > essential to seeing the disadvantage in living forever in ignorance and > suffering. Indeed, if our interest in the dhamma is based on, for > example, a desire for a happy rebirth, or a goal of attaining nibbana as > we conceive it to be, then I am inclined to think that understanding the > right path could be a very difficult task. Dear Jon, Well we can agree on this for sure. And it is very hard to let go of one's view of what the path and nibbana consist of, no matter what our view may be. I am sure I am clinging pretty hard to mine. Best, Robert Ep. 9188 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 9:17pm Subject: Re: _[DhammaStudyGroup]_Vipassana --- upasaka@a... wrote: ... As I understand it, for an > arahant, the khandas, and all dhammas for that matter, have "ceased" in the > sense that no separate, independent, self-sufficient dhammas are any longer > to be observed. Whether or not, or how, this might change with the death of > an arahant I just don't know. I see it as certainly possible that if no > association is maintained at that point with any realm of experience, then > the death of an arahant does, indeed, result in a radical change; but it > would be a change that the arahant would be indifferent to in any case, > inasmuch as once full liberation is attained, there is no longer any sense of > self or independent dhammas anyway,and there no longer is any grasping at > anything, including being and nonbeing. I can *imagine*, however, an arahant > *choosing*, based on compassion for sentient beings, to maintain an > association with some realm or realms of experience. > --------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Howard, This is very well put. And, strange though it may seem, I agree with you! Robert Ep. 9189 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 9:25pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Dukkha (was, Concepts) Thanks, Jon. I did enjoy those entries. I would say, from reading those, that the word 'dukkha' is meant to include all experiences that have a quality of suffering or a tendency to create or lead to suffering in the present or future. This makes a lot of sense. Thanks again, Robert Ep. ================= --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Robert Ep > > On the subject of dukkha (‘suffering’), you commented in a post to > Herman-- > ------------------------------------------ > I would not say that the state in which one is happy but ignorant is > necessarily a state of suffering in itself. I would say it leads to a > future state of suffering. > I also think it is possible to be suffering but not be fully aware of it, > or to interpret it as non-suffering in order to justify one's attachment, > as in heroin addiction. > ------------------------------------------ > > and to Kenneth— > ------------------------------------------ > Since suffering is a 'state', ie, an 'experience', it is only real to the > extent it is experienced as real. It is a subjective sort of category. … > In terms of being permanent or being an object of some kind, you could say > it is not 'real'. But in terms of being something that takes place in > consciousness, I would say it is 'real' at the time it arises, and > non-existent at the time it is not being experienced. > ------------------------------------------ > > This subject of dukkha is a vast and detailed one, and it will not > surprise you to know that, as used in the texts, its meaning has only a > limited correlation with the term ‘suffering’ in its conventional meaning > (!). > > Rather than confuse you with my own limited knowledge on the subject, > however, I have pasted below copies of the entries from ‘Buddhist > Dictionary’ on ‘Dukkha’ and ‘Dukkhataa’. I hope you find these > informative and interesting. > > Jon > > From Nyanatiloka’s ‘Buddhist Dictionary’ at > http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/dic3_d.htm > > ‘DUKKHA’ > (1) 'pain', painful feeling, which may be bodily and mental (s. vedaná). > (2) 'Suffering', 'ill'. > As the first of the Four Noble Truths and the second of the three > characteristics of existence, the term dukkha is not limited to painful > experience as under (1), but refers to the unsatisfactory nature and the > general insecurity of all conditioned phenomena which, on account of their > impermanence, are all liable to suffering, and this includes also > pleasurable experience. Hence 'unsatisfactoriness' or 'liability to > suffering' would be more adequate renderings, if not for stylistic > reasons. > Hence the first truth does not deny the existence of pleasurable > experience, as is sometimes wrongly assumed. > This is illustrated by the following texts: > "Seeking satisfaction in the world, monks, I had pursued my way. That > satisfaction in the world I found. In so far as satisfaction existed in > the world, I have well perceived it by wisdom. Seeking for misery in the > world, monks, I had pursued my way. That misery in the world I found. In > so far as misery existed in the world, I have well perceived it by wisdom. > Seeking for the escape from the world, monks, I had pursued my way. That > escape from the world I found. In so far as an escape from the world > existed, I have well perceived it by wisdom" -- (A. 111, 101). > "If there were no satisfaction to be found in the world, beings would > not be attached to the world .... If there were no misery to be found in > the world, beings would not be repelled by the world .... If there were no > escape from the world, beings could not escape therefrom" -- (A. 111, > 102). > > > ‘DUKKHATA’ > (abstr. noun fr. dukkha): 'the state of suffering', painfulness, > unpleasantness, the unsatisfactoriness of existence. > "There are three kinds of suffering: > (1) suffering as pain (dukkha-dukkhatá), > (2) the suffering inherent in the formations (sankhára-dukkhatá), > (3) the suffering in change (viparináma-dukkhatá)" > -- (S. XLV, 165; D. 33). > > (1) is the bodily or mental feeling of pain as actual]y felt. > (2) refers to the oppressive nature of all formations of existence (i.e. > all conditioned phenomena), due to their continual arising and passing > away; this includes also experiences associated with neutral feeling. > (3) refers to bodily and mental pleasant feelings, "because they are the > cause for the arising of pain when they change" -- (Vis.M. XIV, 34f). > > > > 9190 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 9:38pm Subject: Re:__[DhammaStudyGroup]_Vipassanã --- sarahdhhk@y... wrote: > Mike, I know you must be very busy getting ready for your trip to > Bangkok. We're thinking of you and wish you good flights with > plenty of wise reflection and mindfulness. I'm sure everyone > hear will be very interested to hear any comments you care to > share about your impressions and discussions after you meet > Khun Sujin and friends in Bkk. And Mike, don't forget to let me know how to keep in touch with you! Good journey! Robert Ep. 9191 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 10:05pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Abidhamma books Hi Ken O, --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > > Thanks for the explanation and could you kindly provide the English name > for the first book of Abidhamma and its commentary. Dhammasangani: Buddhist Psychological Ethics Atthasalani: The Expositor (Commentary to this) >Udana commentary > accompanies which book of Abidhamma. Udaana Com. is the Com to: Udaana: Verses of Uplift, (under Khuddaka-nikaaya, NOT abhidhamma) I've been quoting from Masefield's PTS translation of both of these texts. I think a list of the seven books and > its English translated titles and their commentaries will be very helpful. All texts w/English titles and commentaries are listed in the Pali Text Society catalogue...it also indicates which ones the PTS has translated and published: http://www.palitext.demon.co.uk/ You'll see all the Sutta-pitaka and other parts of the Tipitaka are listed too. > Visuddhimagga, is the English title known as Path of Liberation or Path of > Purity. Usually it's called 'The Path of Purification', but the English translations vary I'm sure. Glad to see your keen interest in these texts, Ken. For the Sutta-pitaka translations, I prefer B.Bodhi's, published by Wisdom Books, (Digha Nikaya trans. by M.Walshe) partly because these also contain some commentary notes at the back and tend to be more readable. We've been slowly replacing our PTS ones with these. Sarah 9192 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 10:11pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nibbana --- upasaka@a... wrote: > What I find interesting here is that there is discussed only the remaining of > the *five* sense organs (until death) and the experience of what is pleasant > and unpleasant and of bodily ease and pain coming through them. This > pleasantness, unpleasantness, and bodily ease and pain experienced via the > five senses constitutes the no-longer-relished feelings extinguished at the > death of the arahant. Nowhere is anything said of mental function ceasing > upon the death of the arahant. Hey Howard. You don't think you can get away with that, do you? [hope you do of course]. Regards, Robert Ep. 9193 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 10:25pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] A tentative question --- manji wrote: > If useless things do not hang in your mind, > Any season is a good season for you. beautiful! Robert Ep. 9194 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 10:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Dear Rob Ep, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Sarah, > Thanks for being so welcoming to my questions. I very much appreciate your > thoughtful answers, and it is also a pleasure to converse on these questions, > which as you said, are so 'directly related to....realities to be known now.' .................... S:Thanks Rob. We seem to post at the same time every day (for me, it’s late lunch-time, for you it must be about 2am!.....) I’m pretty ‘addicted’ to your daily ‘splash’ of posts too;-) .................... S:> > I think I can only say to the first 2 questions that this is how it > is...and > > our task is to understand the ‘descriptive’ rather than to reason > why.....The > > only other answer I may add is that they must be exactly this way and > cannot be > > any other way because of the complex way conditions (paccaya) cause them to > be > > like this. So the citta now arises sequentially because of anantara paccaya > > which means it is conditioned by the preceeding citta to arise sequentially > and > > so many, many other conditions to make it be this citta and no other citta > > arising. > R:> I do think this is a good explanation of why each present moment is both > unique > and in a sense solitary, even though it is also completely connected to each > other > factor coming before and after, and all those which surround it in the > present. A > very clear paradox, but a reality. .................... S:Good..you’ve got the idea I was trying to express. .................... .................... S:>> Mindfulness “does not allow the floating away of > moral > > states” (Atth.) > > > > Awareness can be aware of any reality, including awareness (sati). As we’ve > > discussed recently, strictly speaking, it is not aware of itself but of the > > characteristic of sati which has just fallen away. Sati is not aware of a > > process, but just of one reality at these times. It’s thinking which thinks > > about a process of consciousness. > R:> Very good. I am still trying to imagine in a sense what a 'citta' is 'formed > like' and how the 'cetasikas' interact or support it, and how 'sati' sort of > overlooks or opens insight into the whole thing, and how satipathana, like a > mature sati, can see into the full nature of the momentary arising, whereas > sati > would only see its more obvious qualities...... .................... S:Did my post with Atthasalani and Visuddhimagga quotes to Ken O help at all? Like those ingredients in the curry, all the skilful mental factors have to intereact together, perform their own functions and condition each other and the citta and vice versa. Of course, if there isn’t precise awareness of a reality itself, there cannot be awareness of the ‘momentary arising’ or ‘ceasing’ or that reality. That’s why there has to be the clear distinction between different realities and in particular between namas and rupas first. As you suggest, sati has to develop and be aware of these realities more and more precisely. .................... R:> I'd sort of like a kind of molecular chart of these relationships, however > I'm > sure in a way that would give the wrong impression that these events are like > little 'things' that sit there for a second, when in truth they must be more > in > the nature of an open quality of mind and not really occupy any place or > space but > simply co-occur together in spaceless, formless function. .................... S:Yes, we can read all the detail we wish in the abhidhamma texts (with many charts), but it’s still possible to ‘work it all out’ and take all these realities for ‘self’. When awareness is aware of a characteristic of reality, it’s not concerned with time or place or even relationship at that moment, it’s just aware of what is presenting itself, e.g seeing which sees or visible object which is seen at this moment. .................... R:> Since they really have no entity, it is hard to imagine how they arise or > function > at all. Unlike the physical realities, which maintain physical forms that > sort of > 'house' them, the cittas and cetasikas and sati have no such place to dwell. > So > in a sense it is hard to see how or where they really occur at all. > > It is only in conjunction with physical sense organs and physical objects, I > guess > that they can find the conditions to cohere for a moment within the > functioning of > these mechanisms, and so they are associated with sense-door, mind-door and > mind > itself. .................... S:Realities have no entity in the sense of a self, but they still ‘exist’ and have characteristics which can be known when they arise briefly. I don’t think we can say namas or rupas ‘dwell’ anywhere, and although we can talk about the importance of eye-base or heart-base for seeing or thinking to arise, at the moment of awareness of seeing or thinking, there’s no idea of eye-base or heart-base. We know from our studies however, that without these various bases and doorways and other conditions, there couldn’t be seeing or thinking. In this way, reading about these details (all found in ‘Abhidhamma in Daily Life’), helps to get rid of wrong views and ideas of self controlling rather than conditions ‘forming up’ realities. .................... R:> But it would be nice to have alittle more conceptual clarity, which I guess > will > come in time....and then perhaps obscure their reality even more! .................... S:Again it depends on the purpose for study, I think, as I mentioned to Christine, and whether there’s any awareness and understanding while reading and considering. If there’s more confusion, there can be awareness of the confusion too;-) .................... S:>>..... Being aware of these different realities, and understanding > the > > difference between them, is the only way to develop detachment from the > idea of > > a self or a lasting consciousness. Sati is very precise and has a very > specific > > function and characteristic. > R:> Very good. Thanks for going from my abstract to the clarity of the concrete > moment. ..................... S:The Teachings are very ‘concrete’ I find and there is nothing mystical or abstract about sati or the objects it is aware of. .................... S:> even if I sometimes misunderstand your point, > > can’t always provide the answers or am rather slow;-). > > I wouldn't say so. I think you are sincere and very clear, and I appreciate > your > level-headedness, something that I've been missing most of my life. .................... S:Well, the level-headedness is turning quickly to big-headedness......Let me assure you that moments of level-headedness are rare in my day....thanks anyway. .................... R:> Thanks, Sarah. I also find it very enjoyable to dig into the possibilities > of > this present reality. As I said before, I was surprised at my first exposure > to > the commentaries to find them very illuminating and to have a 'warmth' about > them. > They seem to understand the 'luminosity of mind' or at least to express it, > even > if we can't yet get a handle on it ourselves. > > These conversations with you are very special, a kind of Dhamma oasis for me, > for > which I give you much thanks. .................... S:Big bow... You bring out the best in us all, Rob...and we’re very fortunate to have you around.. Sarah ============================= 9195 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 8, 2001 11:05pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The Vietnamese Tipitaka G'Day Binh, Thanks for your prompt response. I have no doubt that you and your website play a big role in encouraging the translation of these excellent texts into Vietnamese and I sincerely hope that further texts and commentaries will be translated too. Alex, it was good to see you on the list recently and I hope your translation efforts are also going well, however slowly. Translators always tell me that they really learn a lot in the process;-) thanks for the info, Binh. Seeya, Sarah --- binh_anson@y... wrote: > > G'day, > > As requested by Sarah, below is a brief overview of the Vietnamese > Tipitaka. (This information will be updated after January 2002). > http://www.budsas.org and http://zencomp.com/greatwisdom > > -ooOoo- 9196 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Fri Nov 9, 2001 0:10am Subject: Web-based Distance Learning MA in Buddhist Studies Dear All, The University of Sunderland proposes an MA, Postgraduate Diploma, and Postgraduate Certificate in Distance-Learning, entirely on the Net. The Program is led by Professor Peter Harvey, Professor of Buddhist Studies, University of Sunderland. Probable start date Sept. 02. For details: http://www.sunderland.ac.uk/buddhist/ metta, Christine 9197 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Fri Nov 9, 2001 4:18am Subject: Re: A tentative question Dear Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Dear Christine, > > It's always good to hear your kind comments, Christine, but I wonder what you > mean by not feeling `up to speed'. I sincerely hope dsg doesn't look like a > speed contest (though I must say I find it hard to keep up with Rob Ep and Ken > O ;-) Please don't ever feel rushed, anyway. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Christine: Sorry, I wasn't clear - it means "not feeling able to compare favourably to, in the expression of knowledge or skill" the other members of this List. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > I think there is a trap of `irrelevant > intellectualising'....Actually to give a `blunt opinion' (and thanks for the > confidence), I think there is a `meditator trap' which has the idea that one > should just do `real' practice and any talk or discussion or study (ESPECIALLY > abhidhamma study) is irrelevant. I also think there is a real `Abhidhamma trap' > where someone has the idea that the amount of detail collected and retained is > an indication of progress or practice in itself. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Christine: I appreciate your explanation of the two traps - 'meditation' and 'abhidhamma'. But I wonder if it is almost a necessary stage to pass through - spending some time in the trap before one recognises the constriction and steps out? .......Is it a trap - or is it a temporary raft? --------------------------------------------------------------------- > As I've mentioned, my first Buddhist teacher was Munindra, who had spent > considerable time with Mahasi Sayadaw and the Mahasi technique was the > `practice' which I followed very intently and intensely in India and Sri lanka. > Fortunately, Munindra himself also encouraged me to study and question the > Teachings. He was one of the kindest people I've ever met and i still have the > greatest respect and fond memories of him. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Christine: May I ask if your first Buddhist teacher Munindra is the same Munindra who was the teacher of Joseph Goldstein and Lama Surya Das? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Still, the meditation was considered > the practice, rather than the study and subsequently I met many meditators who > had hardly read a sutta, let alone discuss it. > Since then, I've also met many in the `abhidhamma trap' who think it is > essential to study every detail and this is often not reflected or related to > daily life or realities at this moment. In other words, the practice lags well > behind the theory, .which on its own can be similar to studying any other > intellectual subject. > Let me just stress right away, that 'my' kilesa (defilements) lead me into one > trap after another, even as I write about the dhamma. I think my comment so far would be that we don't have to follow a > rule or someone else's regime. In other words, if you wish to have ritual, > fine. If you wish to sit and meditate, fine. If you wish to study in detail, > fine. I think the point some of us have been making here is that we all have > different interests and inclinations. In the end it's not the yoga or tai chi I > do that counts, or the music Nina plays or the breathing exercises that Rob Ep > is interested in. In the end it is the state of mind, now, whether we're > studying abhidhamma, concentrating on breath or beating drums that counts. > > We can make a structure in our day such as Ihr abhidhamma study, 1hr drum > beating or whatever. There's nothing wrong with this kind of structure and most > poeple would say that I'm about as `structured' or organised as it gets. I'm > also very aware of how much attachment there is to these structures I have. > Whenever my little structure gets `messed up', I feel sorry ;-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Christine: I don't think it was 'structure in our day' so much as 'structure in my learning and practice'. There is so much information and opinion on the Internet. As a beginner, it is difficult initially to find a way of knowing what is worthwhile to study and what is not. In the Buddhist Dictionary 'Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines' by Nyanatiloka Mahathera, the meaning of 'panna' distinguishes 3 kinds of knowledge with regard to the condition of its arising. http://www.budsas.org/ebud/bud-dict/dic_idx.htm "knowledge knowledge based on thinking (cintá-mayá-paññá), knowledge based on learning (suta-mayá-paññá), knowledge based on mental development (bhávaná-mayá-paññá) (D. 33)." - 'Based on thinking' is that knowledge which one has accquired through one's own thinking, without having learnt it from others. - 'Based on learning' is that knowledge which one has heard from others and thus acquired through learning. - 'Based on mental development' is that knowledge which one has acquired through mental development in this or that way, and which has reached the stage of full concentration" (appaná, q.v.) (Vis.M. XIV). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- So again, > while following our inclinations or structures, if there is some understanding > and awareness of the attachments, expectations, aversions, along with many > other realities, this is more precious than the structure or framework, which > after all is only a concept anyway. > The other point I would stress, and I think this is really at the heart of your > `quandry', is that really there is no self at all to determine at what time and > on what occasions there will be `practice'. If there is an attempt to be aware > of a particular object at a particular time, it shows the clinging to self to > be a certain way and an idea that it is possible to control. > > As you've rightly mentioned before, it's not easy at all to give up an idea of > self and control. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Christine: I am familiar with the terms Impermanence, Suffering and Not-Self - but No Control is not so familiar. Could you quote some references please? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Christine, I'm not sure I have any idea of a `correct way to practice'. I don't > have any idea that studying abhidhamma texts is a time or way to practice > anymore than teaching my students. What I am sure about, however, is that the > time has to be now, there are realities now, and that it is sati and panna > which have to do the work, not `I'. I'm also sure that for sati and panna to do > their work, the conditions that the Buddha stressed so often are essential, > i.e. meeting the `right people', hearing the `right thing', considering and > applying. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Christine: Much of what I am learning is from contact with people on the List, whether directly or as the stimulus to search further. The benefits of having admirable people as friends - "When a monk has admirable people as friends, companions, and colleagues, it is to be expected that he will get to hear at will, easily and without difficulty, talk that is truly sobering and conducive to the opening of awareness, i.e., talk on having few wants, on contentment, on seclusion, on non-entanglement, on arousing persistence, on virtue, on concentration, on discernment, on release, and on the knowledge and vision of release. "When a monk has admirable people as friends, companions, and colleagues, it is to be expected that he will keep his persistence aroused for abandoning unskillful qualities, and for taking on skillful qualities -- steadfast, solid in his effort, not shirking his duties with regard to skillful qualities. "When a monk has admirable people as friends, companions, and colleagues, it is to be expected that he will be discerning, endowed with discernment of arising and passing away -- noble, penetrating, leading to the right ending of stress." -- Ud IV.1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > I'm not sure if any of this helps. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Christine: Tremendously! :-) Much gratitude...... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I really appreciate these questions and > comments of yours and am honoured that you addressed them here to me. You > seem to have very keen interest and are considering a lot very carefully. There > is bound to be plenty of thinking and wondering and doubt in between. However, > these are also realities which can be known when they arise. Sometimes it even > helps to smile or laugh at these tendencies;-) > > We'd all like to be told `what to do' or to be given a short-cut. If it were so > simple, wouldn't we all be enlightened by now? > > I hope to hear back from you and follow this discussion further. I also hope > this doesn't sound like I think I have all the answers which is a long way from > the truth. > > Thanks very much for sharing and I think you'll find that many others are > interested in this same question. > > Sarah 9198 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Nov 9, 2001 5:07am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: A tentative question Hi Christine, to choose a method to practise is indeed a very difficult choice. This is I think the most difficult is to start to learn Buddhism that of one inclinations. My experience of learning is based on the traditional Chinese Sangha method where one stick to a few suttas for five years. To stick a few suttas for five years is I think a very difficult thing to do. Once in a while, I tends to read others but the focus is still the few suttas basing our practise on these few suttas. Then after the teacher will suggest us the other suttas to read other the five years discipline approach. I think mine is very lucky, because the day I pick up a book on Pure Land, it has been with me for six years. I am still practising now with more clarity after I read more on Satipatthana and Abidhamma. The logic given by one Chinese monk is that our mind is full of diverting thoughts, by focusing on a few, one thoughts is less diverse, more focus. Secondly, the monk say as one begin the Buddhism way, one will get confuse easily if one read too many. Thirdly is that the Chinese believe that if one understand one sutta, the rest of the sutta will be much more clearar. Furthermore on the point of controlling, I think when I start the path, I was also thinking of controlling my thoughts which I realise is also incorrect bc thoughts cannot be control. They got to be let go or to be investigate. To control something that was come from nowhere and goes to nowhere to me is quite futile. These are just my personal experience which I like to share with you. To me your keeness in learning the way is indeed much to be rejoice and commendable. No matter what, we hope we could assist you in your path as you have assisted us. Together let us strive with vigour. Kind regards Ken O --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > Dear Sarah, > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > > Dear Christine, > > > It's always good to hear your kind comments, Christine, but I > wonder what you > > mean by not feeling `up to speed'. I sincerely hope dsg > doesn't > look like a > > speed contest (though I must say I find it hard to keep up with Rob > Ep and Ken > > O ;-) Please don't ever feel rushed, anyway. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Christine: Sorry, I wasn't clear - it means "not feeling able to > compare favourably to, in the expression of knowledge or skill" the > other members of this List. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > I think there is a trap of `irrelevant > > intellectualising'....Actually to give a `blunt > opinion' (and > thanks for the > > confidence), I think there is a `meditator trap' which has > the idea > that one > > should just do `real' practice and any talk or discussion > or study > (ESPECIALLY > > abhidhamma study) is irrelevant. I also think there is a > real `Abhidhamma trap' > > where someone has the idea that the amount of detail collected and > retained is > > an indication of progress or practice in itself. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Christine: I appreciate your explanation of the two traps - > 'meditation' and 'abhidhamma'. But I wonder if it is almost a > necessary stage to pass through - spending some time in the trap > before one recognises the constriction and steps out? > .......Is it a trap - or is it a temporary raft? > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > As I've mentioned, my first Buddhist teacher was Munindra, who > had > spent > > considerable time with Mahasi Sayadaw and the Mahasi technique was > the > > `practice' which I followed very intently and intensely in > India > and Sri lanka. > > Fortunately, Munindra himself also encouraged me to study and > question the > > Teachings. He was one of the kindest people I've ever met and i > still have the > > greatest respect and fond memories of him. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Christine: May I ask if your first Buddhist teacher Munindra is the > same Munindra who was the teacher of Joseph Goldstein and Lama Surya > Das? > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Still, the meditation was considered > > the practice, rather than the study and subsequently I met many > meditators who > > had hardly read a sutta, let alone discuss it. > > Since then, I've also met many in the `abhidhamma trap' > who think > it is > > essential to study every detail and this is often not reflected or > related to > > daily life or realities at this moment. In other words, the > practice lags well > > behind the theory, .which on its own can be similar to studying > any other > > intellectual subject. > > Let me just stress right away, that 'my' kilesa (defilements) lead > me into one > > trap after another, even as I write about the dhamma. > > I think my comment so far would be that we don't have to follow a > > rule or someone else's regime. In other words, if you wish to > have > ritual, > > fine. If you wish to sit and meditate, fine. If you wish to study > in detail, > > fine. I think the point some of us have been making here is that we > all have > > different interests and inclinations. In the end it's not the > yoga > or tai chi I > > do that counts, or the music Nina plays or the breathing exercises > that Rob Ep > > is interested in. In the end it is the state of mind, now, whether > we're > > studying abhidhamma, concentrating on breath or beating drums that > counts. > > > > We can make a structure in our day such as Ihr abhidhamma study, > 1hr drum > > beating or whatever. There's nothing wrong with this kind of > structure and most > > poeple would say that I'm about as `structured' or > organised as it > gets. I'm > > also very aware of how much attachment there is to these structures > I have. > > Whenever my little structure gets `messed up', I feel sorry > ;-) > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Christine: I don't think it was 'structure in our day' so much > as 'structure in my learning and practice'. There is so much > information and opinion on the Internet. As a beginner, it is > difficult initially to find a way of knowing what is worthwhile to > study and what is not. > > In the Buddhist Dictionary 'Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines' > by Nyanatiloka Mahathera, the meaning of 'panna' distinguishes 3 > kinds of knowledge with regard to the condition of its arising. > http://www.budsas.org/ebud/bud-dict/dic_idx.htm > > "knowledge knowledge based on thinking (cintá-mayá-paññá), > knowledge > based on learning (suta-mayá-paññá), knowledge based on mental > development (bhávaná-mayá-paññá) (D. 33)." > - 'Based on thinking' is that knowledge which one has accquired > through one's own thinking, without having learnt it from others. > - 'Based on learning' is that knowledge which one has heard from > others and thus acquired through learning. > - 'Based on mental development' is that knowledge which one has > acquired through mental development in this or that way, and which > has reached the stage of full concentration" (appaná, q.v.) > (Vis.M. > XIV). > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > So again, > > while following our inclinations or structures, if there is some > understanding > > and awareness of the attachments, expectations, aversions, along > with many > > other realities, this is more precious than the structure or > framework, which > > after all is only a concept anyway. > > > The other point I would stress, and I think this is really at the > heart of your > > `quandry', is that really there is no self at all to > determine at > what time and > > on what occasions there will be `practice'. If there is an > attempt > to be aware > > of a particular object at a particular time, it shows the clinging > to self to > > be a certain way and an idea that it is possible to control. > > > > As you've rightly mentioned before, it's not easy at all to > give up > an idea of > > self and control. > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Christine: I am familiar with the terms Impermanence, Suffering and > Not-Self - but No Control is not so familiar. Could you quote some > references please? > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Christine, I'm not sure I have any idea of a `correct way > to > practice'. I don't > > have any idea that studying abhidhamma texts is a time or way to > practice > > anymore than teaching my students. What I am sure about, however, > is that the > > time has to be now, there are realities now, and that it is sati > and panna > > which have to do the work, not `I'. I'm also sure that > for sati and > panna to do > > their work, the conditions that the Buddha stressed so often are > essential, > > i.e. meeting the `right people', hearing the `right > thing', > considering and > > applying. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Christine: Much of what I am learning is from contact with people on > the List, whether directly or as the stimulus to search further. > > The benefits of having admirable people as friends - > "When a monk has admirable people as friends, companions, and > colleagues, it is to be expected that he will get to hear at will, > easily and without difficulty, talk that is truly sobering and > conducive to the opening of awareness, i.e., talk on having few > wants, on contentment, on seclusion, on non-entanglement, on arousing > persistence, on virtue, on concentration, on discernment, on release, > and on the knowledge and vision of release. > "When a monk has admirable people as friends, companions, and > colleagues, it is to be expected that he will keep his persistence > aroused for abandoning unskillful qualities, and for taking on > skillful qualities -- steadfast, solid in his effort, not shirking > his duties with regard to skillful qualities. > "When a monk has admirable people as friends, companions, and > colleagues, it is to be expected that he will be discerning, endowed > with discernment of arising and passing away -- noble, penetrating, > leading to the right ending of stress." > > -- Ud IV.1 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I'm not sure if any of this helps. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Christine: Tremendously! :-) Much gratitude...... > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > I really appreciate these questions and > > comments of yours and am honoured that you addressed them here to > me. You > > seem to have very keen interest and are considering a lot very > carefully. There > > is bound to be plenty of thinking and wondering and doubt in > between. However, > > these are also realities which can be known when they arise. > Sometimes it even > > helps to smile or laugh at these tendencies;-) > > > > We'd all like to be told `what to do' or to be given a > short-cut. > If it were so > > simple, wouldn't we all be enlightened by now? > > > > I hope to hear back from you and follow this discussion further. I > also hope > > this doesn't sound like I think I have all the answers which is > a > long way from > > the truth. > > > > Thanks very much for sharing and I think you'll find that many > others are > > interested in this same question. > > > > Sarah 9199 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Nov 9, 2001 5:23am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] cittas- sequential and sati Hi Sarah Thanks for your patient in quoting the text. Presently I am trying to learn the Abidhamma systems of practising. Hence recently I have been asking Abidhammaic questions which sometimes do off track due to my previous views. I try ordering the Book of Analysis and Dispeller of Delusion which Robert has kindly introduced to me. I am still waiting for PTS to respond my email of my ordering, but till date I have no reply. Is there any other way to buy it, do you know of any good web on line store that sells these books. I believe they are impt to my studies on Satipatthana and Abidhamma. Thanks once again and at times I feel guilty that you have spend so much time in explaining Abidhamma terms to me and also to many others that have assist me in the understanding of Abidhamma. Kind regards Ken O --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Ken O, > > > Sarah: > >.....The only other answer I may add is that they must be exactly this > > way and cannot be any other way because of the complex way conditions > > (paccaya) cause them to be like this. So the citta now arises > sequentially > > because of anantara paccaya which means it is conditioned by the > > preceeding citta to arise sequentially and so many, many other > conditions > > to make it be this citta and no other citta arising. > .................... > > > k: I was thinking why can't we have many simultanoues arising and > falling > > of cittas. Why would one have to fall before another arise? This is > maybe > > of our way of thinking due to science that brain works in parallel > rather > > than sequential. Would you like to quote a few commentaries or notes > or > > links that help us understand more on this sequential process. > .................... > > Sarah: > I’d like to give some links, but most of the detail in this area that I > have is > in texts that are not on-line as yet, so I’ll try to quote selectively > (i.e > choose the shorter ones;-) Why can’t there be seeing and hearing at the > same > time? Why do cittas (consciusness) arise as they do? I think these > questions > are the imponderables and that it is better to understand that this is > the way > it is (because of all those conditions). > > One of the most useful commentaries is the Atthasalini (The Expositor), > available from PTS. It’s not a big book and much easier to read, I > think, than > the English translation of Dhammasangani (1st book of the > Abhidhamma)which it > accompanies. > > The following quote is from Atth (63): > > ‘....... is termed ‘consciousness’ , because it arranges itself > in a > series (‘cintoti’, or, its own series or continuity) by way of > apperception in > a process of thought. And the resultant is also termed ‘consciousness’ > because > it is accumulated (cito) by kamma and corruptions. > > Moreover, all (four classes) are > termed > ‘consciousness’ because they are variegated (citra) acording to > circumstance. > The meaning of consciousness may also be understood from its capacity of > producing a variety of diversity of effects. > > Herein consciousness with lust is one thing, that with hate is > another..........’ > > This one comes a little later from the same text at (112). Again citta > is being > described: > > ‘.....As to its characteristic, etc., cognizing object is its > characteristic, > forerunning is its function, connecting is its manifestation, a mental > and > material organism is its proximate cause. There is no such > thing > as consciousness in the four planes of existence without the > characteristic of > cognizing. All consciousness has it. But when a ‘door’ is reached at > the > place where the ‘object’ is evolved, consciousness is the forerunner, > the > precursor. A visible object seen by the eye is cognized by > consciousness > etc...an idea known by the mind is cognized by > consciousness.............. > > The consciousness which arises next does so immediately after the > preceding > consciousness, forming a connected series. Thus it has connection as > manifestation...’ > > ******************** > > Finally on this question of cittas, let me just refer you also to the > Visuddhimagga, which many people have already. At XX30, it describes in > detail > the 89 kinds of consciousness. At 1V n13, there is a lengthy discussion > on > bhavanga and other cittas and also a discussion of the treatment of > these in > the Suttas, Abhidhamma and Commentaries and the ‘inter-connection’. > > A shorter passage which I’ll quote comes from V11139 addressing the > question > you’ve raised before about the cessation of cittas: > > ‘...As to the shortness of the moment; in the ultimate sense the > life-moment > of living beings is extremely short, being only as much as the > occurrence of a > single conscious moment. Just as the chariot wheel, when it is rolling, > rolls > (that is, touches the ground) only on one point of (the circumference > of) its > tyre, and, when it is at rest, rests only on one point, so too, the life > of > living beings lasts only for a single conscius moment. When that > consciusness > has ceased, the being is said to have ceased, according it is said: ‘In > a past > conscious moment he did live, not he does live, not he will live. In a > future > conscious moment not he did live. not he does live, he will live. In > the > present conscious moment not he did live, he does live, not he will > live. > > ‘ “Life, person, pleasure, pain-just these alone > Join in one conscious moment that flicks by. > Ceased aggregates of those dead or alive > Are all alike, gone never to return. > No (world is) born if (consciousness is) not > produced; when that is present, then it lives; > When consciousness dissolves, the world is dead: > The highest sense this concept will allow’ ‘(Nd.1.42). > > This is how death should be recollected as to the shortness of the > moment.’ > > > ******************** > Thanks Ken, for giving me an opportunity to reflect on these quotes, > especially > the last one which is always a condition for ‘wise attention’ for me.> > .................... > > Sarah: > > > > Yes, sati (awareness) is a mental factor which sometimes > accompanies > > > citta (consciousness). It accompanies all wholesome (kusala) cittas > and > > is aware of> the object for those moments only. It can be aware of any > > reality, but is not necessarily (read very seldom if at all) at the > level > > of satipatthana which is aware of a reality as not self. So for > example, > > if there is generosity or kindness without ever having heard the > Buddha’s > > teachings, at the moments these mental states arise with the wholesome > > cittas, there is sati which is mindful of what is skilful and prevents > > that which is unskilful, but not necessarily accompanied by wisdom. > > Mindfulness “does not allow the floating away of moral states” (Atth.) > > .................. > > > k: Could you give more details on the last quote. Very interesting > idea > > that I like to ponder on. Secondly since sati only accompany the > kusala > > citta, so do we need to be aware when we are have kusala cetasikas for > eg > > metta. Is it due to akusala cittas that might arise due to the > falling of > > kusala cetasikas that we need to practise sati. > .................... > > Sarah: > There are many excellent details about the characteristic of sati > (mindfulness) > in Atthasalini again (121f): > > ‘....As the young treasurer of the king, in charge of the tenfold > treasure, > both early and late causes the king to take note of and remember the > royal > possession, so mindfulness takes note of, remembers a moral act. Hence > the > Elder said: ‘As, your majesty, the king’s confidential adviser early and > late > makes the universal monarch remember: so many, lord, are your > elephants, so > many horses, so many chariots, so much infantry, so much bullion, so > much gold, > so much property; let your majesty remember it- even so, your majesty, > mindfulness does not allow the floating away of moral states, such as > the four > applications of mindfulness, the four supreme efforts........... > And as > that jewel, the confidential adviser of the universal monarch, knowing > what is > diadvantageous and what is advantageous, removes the disadvantageous and > promotes the advantageous, so mindfulness, searching well the courses of > advantageous and disadvantageous states;- ‘these are disadvantageous > states, > misconduct in body’, etc, removes the disadvantageous states, misconduct > in > body.............It should > be > regarded as a door-post from being firmly established in the object, and > as a > door-keeper from guarding the door of the senses.’ > > Ken, I think I’ve got a bit carried away with the typing of quotes, so > I’ll > just address the other points in brief with no more quotes;-) > > To be accurate, sati accompanies all the sobhana cittas which include > the > kusala cittas, vipaka cittas and kiriya cittas (of the arahat). You can > find > full details of these in Nina’s books on the websites linked here: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/links > > We’re not aware of anything (as you know) but sati is aware of any > reality > presenting itself, regardless of whether it is metta, unkindness, wise > consideration, aversion, seeing or visible object. Any selection or > choice > shows there is no sati at that moment. The reason sati (of satipatthana) > needs > to develop is in order to be mindful of what really is appearing now, > not what > we’ve always taken to be appearing now. By being aware (with > understading) of > these realities, it becomes more and more apparent what their > characteristics > are and what the meaning of anatta is. However, if we don’t hear and > consider a > lot of details about metta and compassion for example, we’ll think there > is > awareness of them when really it is attachment or sorrow that is the > reality. > > I’d just like to stress that ‘we’ don’t need to practise anything. > Understanding is the key, rather than a wrong idea of ‘self that can do > or > prctise’. > .................... > > Sarah: > > > ...I think it’s most useful to consider what are the > > > > realities being experienced at the present moment. By beginning to > be > > > aware (sati being aware) of a nama or rupa (mental or physical > > phenomena) > > > now, such as seeing or visible object, feeling or hardness and so > on, > > this is the way sati develops. Being aware of these different > realities, > > and understanding the difference between them, is the only way to > develop > > detachment from the idea of a self or a lasting consciousness. Sati is > > very precise and has a very specific function and characteristic. > .................... > > > k: In a sense, only kusala cittas helps to developed panna, then why > do > > we need to be in sati of akusala cittas as suggeted by Satipatthana. > Also > > does all these conditioning due to our memory that there is a self. > Is > > memory a universal cetasikas. > > .................... > > Sarah: > Panna (rt understanding) and sati need to know and be aware of many, > many > different realities without any selection. They can then ‘see’ the > advantageous > and disadvantageous as discussed in the quote I gave. The lack of sati > and > panna is due to ignorance and wrong view and the lack of ‘guarding’ the > sense > doors. Sanna, (perception or memory) is one key universal cetasika but I > think > this post has already become too long ;-) > > Thanks for your patience and that of others who’ve read through all the > quotes. > Hope this helps;-) > > Sarah