9800

From: Weaver <wordweaver@a...> 
Date: Mon Dec 3, 2001 3:30pm
Subject: " Hello "

 	
I am a new member, my name is Weaver and I have just recently become involved in a reiki healing group. I have received my level 1 attunement which in turn has lead me in search of the Buddha. I look forward to reading your wise words. Thank you.

Weaver
	
9801

From: <hhofman@d...> 
Date: Mon Dec 3, 2001 3:40pm
Subject: Re: [dsg] Was the Buddha a Theravadin?

 	
Dear Mike,

One of the things I got out of the passages I quoted was that the 
adherence to views (of any kind) is a roadblock to the achievement of 
the goal of Buddhist practice, which according to MN 24 Ratha-vinta 
Sutta is formulated thus:

The holy life is lived under the Blessed One, my friend, for the sake 
of total Unbinding through lack of clinging.

I am sure that you know, Mike, that the above sutta (MN 24) is the 
only one in the whole Sutta Pitaka that so much as mentions the seven 
purities, yet hundreds of years later the seven purities become the 
foundation for the entire Visuddhimagga, which is probably the most 
cited work in this group.

So what's the go?

The Buddha teaches that one must dispense with views, or keep on 
suffering. The Visuddhimagga seems to proliferate views. (This group 
has previously engaged in fertile discussions re cittas).

Would it not be better to go to One who knows, rather than to one who 
knows One who knows? You are saying that the Theravada is the 
tradition that has preserved the word of the Buddha. Yet I find 
myself spending hours attempting to filter out the words of the 
Buddha from the words of the Theravada tradition.

Supplanting is a very loaded word, I find. Happily, reality is not 
found in books, and the three marks of reality are not yet the 
subject of copyright or licencing arrangements with Microsoft.

I wish you well


Herman

-- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" <mlnease@y...> wrote:
> Great quotes Herman--thanks!--though I don't see how
> they relate to your subject heading. The Theravaada
> is the tradition that has preserved the you've
> copiedsuttas (despite more that twenty centuries of
> attempts to supplant them)--not vice versa.
> 
> mike
> 
> --- hhofman@d... wrote:
> > SnI.1 Uraga Sutta
> > 
> > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind
> > and knows about the world: "This is all unreal,"
> > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond,
> > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. 
> > 
> > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind,
> > greedless he knows: "This is all unreal,"
> > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond,
> > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. 
> > 
> > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind,
> > lust-free he knows: "This is all unreal,"
> > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond,
> > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. 
> > 
> > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind,
> > hate-free he knows: "This is all unreal,"
> > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond,
> > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. 
> > 
> > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind,
> > delusion-free he knows: "This is all unreal,"
> > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond,
> > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. 
> > 
> > SnIV.5 Paramatthaka Sutta
> > 
> > "A person who associates himself with certain views,
> > considering them 
> > as best and making them supreme in the world, he
> > says, because of 
> > that, that all other views are inferior; therefore
> > he is not free 
> > from contention (with others). In what is seen,
> > heard, cognized and 
> > in ritual observances performed, he sees a profit
> > for himself. Just 
> > by laying hold of that view he regards every other
> > view as worthless. 
> > Those skilled (in judgment) say that (a view
> > becomes) a bond if, 
> > relying on it, one regards everything else as
> > inferior. Therefore a 
> > bhikkhu should not depend on what is seen, heard or
> > cognized, nor 
> > upon ritual observances. He should not present
> > himself as equal to, 
> > nor imagine himself to be inferior, nor better than,
> > another. 
> > Abandoning (the views) he had (previously) held and
> > not taking up 
> > (another), he does not seek a support even in
> > knowledge. Among those 
> > who dispute he is certainly not one to take sides.
> > He does not [have] 
> > recourse to a view at all. In whom there is no
> > inclination to either 
> > extreme, for becoming or non-becoming, here or in
> > another existence, 
> > for him there does not exist a fixed viewpoint on
> > investigating the 
> > doctrines assumed (by others). Concerning the seen,
> > the heard and the 
> > cognized he does not form the least notion. That
> > brahmana who does 
> > not grasp at a view, with what could he be
> > identified in the world? 
> > "They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion);
> > doctrines are not 
> > accepted by them. A (true) brahmana is beyond, does
> > not fall back on 
> > views." 
> > 
> > 
> > Herman

	
9802

From: <binh_anson@y...> 
Date: Mon Dec 3, 2001 4:03pm
Subject: Nina's book ... Re: Questions on the Paramis

 	
--- In dhammastudygroup@y..., robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote:

> BTW, the book I recommended was the one by Nina 
> http://www.abhidhamma.org/perfections%20of%20enlightenment.htm

-------------------------------------------------------------

BA: G'day Robert,

That on-line version needs more work on its presentation: the Table 
of Contents should include other Chapters, from 7 to 10. The 
footnotes also need to be moved to the end of each chapter.

Metta,
Binh
	
9803

From: <robertkirkpatrick@r...> 
Date: Mon Dec 3, 2001 7:00pm
Subject: Nina's book ... Re: Questions on the Paramis

 	
--- 
Thanks Binh,
Yes, I realise this. I am very lazy, that is the problem.
I will get around to it eventually. If you wanted to put it on your 
web-site you could take it and format it in your usual stylish way. 
(And then I could copy yours back to mine).
best wishes
robert

In dhammastudygroup@y..., binh_anson@y... wrote:
> --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote:
> 
> > BTW, the book I recommended was the one by Nina 
> > http://www.abhidhamma.org/perfections%20of%20enlightenment.htm
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> BA: G'day Robert,
> 
> That on-line version needs more work on its presentation: the Table 
> of Contents should include other Chapters, from 7 to 10. The 
> footnotes also need to be moved to the end of each chapter.
> 
> Metta,
> Binh
	
9804

From: m. nease <mlnease@y...> 
Date: Mon Dec 3, 2001 8:28pm
Subject: Re: [dsg] Was the Buddha a Theravadin?

 	
Hi Herman,

I t hink the confusion may be that, in the suttas, the
word 'ditthi' is often used as a synonym for
micchaditthi. In fact, as has been lavishly
documented on this list, sammaditthi, right view, is
the indispensible precursor to the development and the
completion of the eightfold path.

mike

--- hhofman@d... wrote:
> Dear Mike,
> 
> One of the things I got out of the passages I quoted
> was that the 
> adherence to views (of any kind) is a roadblock to
> the achievement of 
> the goal of Buddhist practice, which according to MN
> 24 Ratha-vinta 
> Sutta is formulated thus:
> 
> The holy life is lived under the Blessed One, my
> friend, for the sake 
> of total Unbinding through lack of clinging.
> 
> I am sure that you know, Mike, that the above sutta
> (MN 24) is the 
> only one in the whole Sutta Pitaka that so much as
> mentions the seven 
> purities, yet hundreds of years later the seven
> purities become the 
> foundation for the entire Visuddhimagga, which is
> probably the most 
> cited work in this group.
> 
> So what's the go?
> 
> The Buddha teaches that one must dispense with
> views, or keep on 
> suffering. The Visuddhimagga seems to proliferate
> views. (This group 
> has previously engaged in fertile discussions re
> cittas).
> 
> Would it not be better to go to One who knows,
> rather than to one who 
> knows One who knows? You are saying that the
> Theravada is the 
> tradition that has preserved the word of the Buddha.
> Yet I find 
> myself spending hours attempting to filter out the
> words of the 
> Buddha from the words of the Theravada tradition.
> 
> Supplanting is a very loaded word, I find. Happily,
> reality is not 
> found in books, and the three marks of reality are
> not yet the 
> subject of copyright or licencing arrangements with
> Microsoft.
> 
> I wish you well
> 
> 
> Herman

p.s. Spare us the sarcasm. Good bye and good luck.

> -- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease"
> <mlnease@y...> wrote:
> > Great quotes Herman--thanks!--though I don't see
> how
> > they relate to your subject heading. The
> Theravaada
> > is the tradition that has preserved the you've
> > copiedsuttas (despite more that twenty centuries
> of
> > attempts to supplant them)--not vice versa.
> > 
> > mike
> > 
> > --- hhofman@d... wrote:
> > > SnI.1 Uraga Sutta
> > > 
> > > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind
> > > and knows about the world: "This is all unreal,"
> > > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond,
> > > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. 
> > > 
> > > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind,
> > > greedless he knows: "This is all unreal,"
> > > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond,
> > > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. 
> > > 
> > > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind,
> > > lust-free he knows: "This is all unreal,"
> > > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond,
> > > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. 
> > > 
> > > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind,
> > > hate-free he knows: "This is all unreal,"
> > > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond,
> > > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. 
> > > 
> > > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind,
> > > delusion-free he knows: "This is all unreal,"
> > > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond,
> > > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. 
> > > 
> > > SnIV.5 Paramatthaka Sutta
> > > 
> > > "A person who associates himself with certain
> views,
> > > considering them 
> > > as best and making them supreme in the world, he
> > > says, because of 
> > > that, that all other views are inferior;
> therefore
> > > he is not free 
> > > from contention (with others). In what is seen,
> > > heard, cognized and 
> > > in ritual observances performed, he sees a
> profit
> > > for himself. Just 
> > > by laying hold of that view he regards every
> other
> > > view as worthless. 
> > > Those skilled (in judgment) say that (a view
> > > becomes) a bond if, 
> > > relying on it, one regards everything else as
> > > inferior. Therefore a 
> > > bhikkhu should not depend on what is seen, heard
> or
> > > cognized, nor 
> > > upon ritual observances. He should not present
> > > himself as equal to, 
> > > nor imagine himself to be inferior, nor better
> than,
> > > another. 
> > > Abandoning (the views) he had (previously) held
> and
> > > not taking up 
> > > (another), he does not seek a support even in
> > > knowledge. Among those 
> > > who dispute he is certainly not one to take
> sides.
> > > He does not [have] 
> > > recourse to a view at all. In whom there is no
> > > inclination to either 
> > > extreme, for becoming or non-becoming, here or
> in
> > > another existence, 
> > > for him there does not exist a fixed viewpoint
> on
> > > investigating the 
> > > doctrines assumed (by others). Concerning the
> seen,
> > > the heard and the 
> > > cognized he does not form the least notion. That
> > > brahmana who does 
> > > not grasp at a view, with what could he be
> > > identified in the world? 
> > > "They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion);
> > > doctrines are not 
> > > accepted by them. A (true) brahmana is beyond,
> does
> > > not fall back on 
> > > views." 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Herman


	
9805

From: <upasaka@a...> 
Date: Mon Dec 3, 2001 4:03pm
Subject: Re: [dsg] Parinibbana Subcommentary

 	
Hi, Suan -

In a message dated 12/3/01 10:11:05 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
abhidhammika@y... writes:


> 
> Dear Dhamma Friends
> 
> The following is the first part of Parinibbana Subcommentary written 
> in response to the questions and statements of Upasaka Howard, Robert 
> Epstein, and Mike Neace. This first part deals with Upasaka
> Howard's question regarding the exact meaning of `Apannattikabhaavo - 
> the state of undefined reality.' In the second part of the
> subcommentary, I will directly address the statements of Robert 
> Epstein. In that second part, I will also include the meaning of the 
> last mind, which partly satisfies Howard's desire to know the exact 
> meaning of consciousness. If space allowed, I will also respond to 
> Mike's question regarding why the term `vatta' was translated as
> machinary. Otherwise, Mike will have to wait for the third part of 
> the subcommentary. 
> 
> 
> 1. PARINIBBANA COMMENTARY PALI
> 
> "Parinibbutaa naama arahattapattito patthaaya kilesavattassa 
> khepitattaa sa-upaadisesena, carimacittanirodhena khandhavattassa 
> khepitattaa anupaadisesena caati dviihi parinibbaanehi 
> parinibbutaa, anupaadaano viya padiipo apannattikabhaavaam gataati 
> attho."
> 
> "`Parinibbutaa' is the ultimate cool by means of two-way complete 
> extinguishments, one with the existential residues emptied of 
> defilement machinery ever since attainment of Arahatta awakening, and 
> the other without the existential residues emptied of psychophysical 
> machinery by termination of the last mind (the dying consciousness). 
> It has the meaning of reaching the state of the undefined reality 
> like the lamp without fuel." 
> 
> 
> Carimacittanirodho – termination of the last mind 
> Apannattikabhaavo - the state of undefined reality
> 
> 
> 2. PARINIBBANA SUBCOMMENTARY
> 
> Howard wrote:
> 
> "Certainly, taken at face value, this commentary suggests
> parinibbana as a kind of nullity. A couple matters remain: (1) The 
> exact meaning of Apannattikabhaavaam - the state of undefined 
> reality, and the exact meaning of vi~n~nana, which I take as the 
> dualistic operation of separating out an individualized object from 
> the potential field of awareness, a special type of knowing/~nana."
> 
> 
> The expression `apannattikabhaavo - the state of undefined
> reality' has given both Howard and Robert Epstein an opportunity to 
> undergo profound contemplation, as it would everybody else. 
> 
> Therefore, this unique expression has become a suitable topic for 
> further analysis and elucidation as Buddhaghosa did not elaborate on 
> it, at least on this occasion.
> 
> The expression `Apannattikabhaavo' can be broken up 
> as `a+pannatti+ika+bhaavo'. 
> 
> The term `pannatti' has the same meaning as `paññatti'. Therefore, 
> pannatti means a name, a convention, or a verbalization as `paññatti' 
> would. We all know that a name can refer to either an existent 
> phenomenon or a non-existent category such as God the Creator. No 
> offense to theists amid the Buddhists! 
> 
> In Pali texts, the term that describes the opposite of a non-existent 
> category is `paramattho – a reality'. Examples of realities are 
> matter and mind. No offense to extremist Mahayanists amid the 
> Theravadiis and scientists!
> 
> Now, let us look at the combination `a+pannatti'. The prefix
> `a' in `apannatti' means `not' or `no' just like
> the prefix `a' in the words `amoral' and `amorphous' giving the 
> opposite meanings of `moral' and `morphous'. 
> 
> Thus, we get `not + name (or convention, or verbalization)'.
> 
> And, what about the bit `ika'? The suffix `ika' means `having or 
> doing something that the preceding term indicates.'
> 
> Thus, the combination `pannatti+ika' means `having + name (or 
> convention, or verbalization).' 
> 
> Now, when we add both the prefix and the suffix to the 
> term `pannatti', we get the `apannattika – something
> not having a name, something not of convention, something not of 
> verbalization, or something undefined. 
> 
> The word `bhaava' denotes a state. Therefore, the 
> expression `apannattikabhaavo' refers to the state of something 
> unconventional, unverbalizable, or undefinable.
> 
> As we mentioned earlier above, the antonym of the term `paññatti' in 
> the Pali texts, is the term `paramattho – a reality'. Therefore, the 
> expression `apannattikabhaavo' means the state of something
> existent, something real, but not subject to verbalization, or 
> conventionalization.
> 
> The above analysis should satisfy Howard's request for the exact 
> meaning of apannattikabhaavo – the state of undefined reality.
> 
> Now, I will try to answer why Buddhaghosa described parinibbutaa as 
> the state of undefined reality.
> 
> By using the espression `apannattikabhaavo - the state of
> undefined reality', Buddhaghosa has killed two birds with one stone. 
> We could toy with the idea of using the term `paramattho – a
> reality' instead of `apannatti'. But, that could deprive us of the 
> ability to convey the meanings of unverbalizableness and 
> undefinableness. Not only that handicap, paramattho could refer to 
> other types of realities as well, which we can also verbalize and 
> define easily. Therefore, it is a very clever choice of word that 
> Buddhaghosa described parinibbutaa as `apannattikabhaavo - the state 
> of undefined reality'.
> 
> Now, what is the meaning of undefinableness or unverbalizableness? 
> Why did Buddhaghosa regarded parinibbutaa as being undefinable?
> 
> The world is programmed to think only in terms of stereotypes and 
> stereotyping. It is programmed to verbalize only in terms of ready 
> expressions and convenient vocabulary.
> 
> Our linguistic stereotypes include both existent and non-existent 
> categories. But, all our verbalizable catagories refer only to either 
> mind and mental (associates and) products, or matter and material 
> things.
> 
> In short, we are programmed to define things and beings only in the 
> terminology of mind and matter, the two main existential realities. 
> This two-reality existential programming has conditioned us to regard 
> anything outside psychophysical givens as nullity.
> 
> The Arahatta awakening that Gotama the Buddha has discovered is 
> capable of demolishing our existential programming and allowing us to 
> realize the third reality outside mind and matter. Here, the 
> term `mind' includes mental associates (cetasikas) as well. Because 
> this third reality is outside mind and matter, we cannot verbalize it 
> in terms of psychophysical existences. Yet, this third reality exists 
> as parinibbutaa, the ultimate cool. As Buddhaghosa has done, we can 
> describe parinibbutaa only as complete extinguishment of defilements 
> and psychophysical existence. 
> 
> Therefore, the meaning of undefinableness in the expression `the 
> state of undefined reality' is that parinibbaana is an existence
> that we cannot define in terms of mind and matter.
> 
============================
Thank you for all the foregoing detailed analysis. It strikes me from 
that analysis, that a possible meaning for 'apannattikabhaavo' might be 
"nonconceptual state of being". Is not one meaning of 'pa~n~nati' that of 
"concept"? If this is a possible reading, then it is possible that 
parinibbana may be a state not of "undefined reality" but, rather, a 
nonconceptual state of being, a state of direct knowing, unmediated by 
concept. What do you think?

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) 




	
9806

From: Sarah <sarahdhhk@y...> 
Date: Mon Dec 3, 2001 9:10pm
Subject: Re: [dsg] Was the Buddha a Theravadin?

 	
Dear Howard, Herman & Mike,

Against my better judgement and forsaking office and home chores (following yr
example, Christine...), let me take a bite at the bait;-))

I’m looking at another translation of the Uraga Sutta by Ven Saddhatissa who
was/is (I’ve lost touch) a very fine Pali scholar and monk. He summarises at
the top: ‘the monk who discards all human passions is compared to a snake that
casts its skin’.

I don’t have the Pali, but can’t imagine where the ‘This is all unreal’ comes
from in the other translation below. In V.Saddhatissa's translation. We read
‘gives up the Cycle of Existence’ which of course is a reference to attaining
arahatship. I’ll just quote the first few stanzas:

“Uraga Sutta, The Snake’s Skin

1. He who gives up anger which has arisen, as the snake poison diffused in the
body is removed by antidotes, that monk gives up the Cycle of Exostence as the
snake sheds its old, decayed skin.

2. He who has completely destroyed lust as one cuts off a lotus flower in a
lake, that monk......

3. He who has completely destroyed craving like drying up a once
swiftly-flowing river.......

4. He who has completely destroyed pride like a weak bridge of reeds swept away
by a mightly flood....

5. He who does not see any substantiality in forms of becoming as one does not
find flowers on a fig tree...
..................................................” <end quote>


> hhofman@d... writes:
> 
> 
> > SnI.1 Uraga Sutta
> > 
> > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind
> > and knows about the world: "This is all unreal,"
> > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond,
> > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. 
> > 
> > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind,
> > greedless he knows: "This is all unreal,"
> > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond,
> > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. 
> > 
> > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind,
> > lust-free he knows: "This is all unreal,"
> > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond,
> > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. 
> > 
> > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind,
> > hate-free he knows: "This is all unreal,"
> > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond,
> > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. 
> > 
> > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind,
> > delusion-free he knows: "This is all unreal,"
> > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond,
> > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. 
> > 
> > SnIV.5 Paramatthaka Sutta
> > 
> =============================

In the last stanza I quote above, the reference to substantiality is I’m sure
to self or atta.

When we read about the need to give up views, ritual, dogma and the like, the
references are of course to wrong views (as described at length in many places
such as in the Brahmajala Sutta) and not of course to right view or right
understanding.

While we’re on the snake theme, in the Alagaddupama sutta (Snake simile, MN22),
there is a discussion about the 6 grounds for false views.:

‘....he considers corporeality thus: “This is mine, this I am, this is my
self”......

and so on for the other khandhas.

At the risk of being accused of serious nit-picking or entering into more
proliferations, I’d also like to make a brief comment on Herman’s quote here as
well:

--- hhofman@d... wrote: > Dear Mike,
> 
> One of the things I got out of the passages I quoted was that the 
> adherence to views (of any kind) is a roadblock to the achievement of 
> the goal of Buddhist practice, which according to MN 24 Ratha-vinta 
> Sutta is formulated thus:
> 
> The holy life is lived under the Blessed One, my friend, for the sake 
> of total Unbinding through lack of clinging.
> 

In B.Bodhi’ s translation, we read;

‘ “Friend, it is for the sake of final Nibbana without clinging that the holy
life is lived under the Blessed One.” ‘* (see note at end of post, unless you
prefer to filter it out;-) 

I'm not sure if this is what you understood by "Unbinding' in the translation
you used above.

Herman, I’d better finish here;-)

Sarah

* (the Pali is given in the footnote as anupaadaanaparinibbaana, which it says
the MA glosses as appacayaparinibbaana, ‘final Nibbana that has no condition’,
explaining that ‘upaadaana has two meanings: grasping (gaha.na), as in the
usual passage on the four types of clinging; and condition (paccaya), as
illustrated by this passage. The commentators explain ‘final Nibbana without
clinging’ either as the fruit of arahatship, because it cannot be grasped by
any of the four types of clinging; or as Nibbana the unconditioned, because it
has not arisen through any condition’)


	
9807

From: <upasaka@a...> 
Date: Mon Dec 3, 2001 4:38pm
Subject: Re: [dsg] Was the Buddha a Theravadin?

 	
Hi, Sarah (and all) -

Yes, I also own Ven. Saddhatissa's wonderful translation of the 
Sutta-Nipata, and he definitely uses 'insubstantial' instead of 'unreal'. I 
also don't have the Pali, but it seems to me that 'insubstantial' would be a 
"safer" word than 'unreal', because 'unreal' could be taken to mean 
"absolutely without existence", which leans towards the nihilistic pole, 
whereas 'insubstantial' tends more towards the middle-way (or emptiness) 
perspective of the Dhamma. One translation that uses 'unreal' is the 
translation by Thanissaro Bhikkhu to be found on Access to insight.

With metta,
Howard

In a message dated 12/4/01 12:12:15 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
sarahdhhk@y... writes:


> Dear Howard, Herman & Mike,
> 
> Against my better judgement and forsaking office and home chores (following 
> yr
> example, Christine...), let me take a bite at the bait;-))
> 
> I’m looking at another translation of the Uraga Sutta by Ven Saddhatissa 
> who
> was/is (I’ve lost touch) a very fine Pali scholar and monk. He summarises 
> at
> the top: ‘the monk who discards all human passions is compared to a snake 
> that
> casts its skin’.
> 
> I don’t have the Pali, but can’t imagine where the ‘This is all unreal’ 
> comes
> from in the other translation below. In V.Saddhatissa's translation. We 
> read
> ‘gives up the Cycle of Existence’ which of course is a reference to 
> attaining
> arahatship. I’ll just quote the first few stanzas:
> 
> “Uraga Sutta, The Snake’s Skin
> 
> 1. He who gives up anger which has arisen, as the snake poison diffused in 
> the
> body is removed by antidotes, that monk gives up the Cycle of Exostence as 
> the
> snake sheds its old, decayed skin.
> 
> 2. He who has completely destroyed lust as one cuts off a lotus flower in a
> lake, that monk......
> 
> 3. He who has completely destroyed craving like drying up a once
> swiftly-flowing river.......
> 
> 4. He who has completely destroyed pride like a weak bridge of reeds swept 
> away
> by a mightly flood....
> 
> 5. He who does not see any substantiality in forms of becoming as one does 
> not
> find flowers on a fig tree...
> ..................................................� <end quote>
> 
> 
> > hhofman@d... writes:
> > 
> > 
> > > SnI.1 Uraga Sutta
> > > 
> > > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind
> > > and knows about the world: "This is all unreal,"
> > > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond,
> > > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. 
> > > 
> > > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind,
> > > greedless he knows: "This is all unreal,"
> > > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond,
> > > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. 
> > > 
> > > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind,
> > > lust-free he knows: "This is all unreal,"
> > > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond,
> > > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. 
> > > 
> > > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind,
> > > hate-free he knows: "This is all unreal,"
> > > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond,
> > > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. 
> > > 
> > > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind,
> > > delusion-free he knows: "This is all unreal,"
> > > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond,
> > > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. 
> > > 
> > > SnIV.5 Paramatthaka Sutta
> > > 
> > =============================
> 
> In the last stanza I quote above, the reference to substantiality is I’m 
> sure
> to self or atta.
> 
> When we read about the need to give up views, ritual, dogma and the like, 
> the
> references are of course to wrong views (as described at length in many 
> places
> such as in the Brahmajala Sutta) and not of course to right view or right
> understanding.
> 
> While we’re on the snake theme, in the Alagaddupama sutta (Snake simile, 
> MN22),
> there is a discussion about the 6 grounds for false views.:
> 
> ‘....he considers corporeality thus: “This is mine, this I am, this is my
> self�......
> 
> and so on for the other khandhas.
> 
> At the risk of being accused of serious nit-picking or entering into more
> proliferations, I’d also like to make a brief comment on Herman’s quote 
> here as
> well:
> 
> --- hhofman@d... wrote: > Dear Mike,
> > 
> > One of the things I got out of the passages I quoted was that the 
> > adherence to views (of any kind) is a roadblock to the achievement of 
> > the goal of Buddhist practice, which according to MN 24 Ratha-vinta 
> > Sutta is formulated thus:
> > 
> > The holy life is lived under the Blessed One, my friend, for the sake 
> > of total Unbinding through lack of clinging.
> > 
> 
> In B.Bodhi’ s translation, we read;
> 
> ‘ “Friend, it is for the sake of final Nibbana without clinging that the 
> holy
> life is lived under the Blessed One.� ‘* (see note at end of post, unless 
> you
> prefer to filter it out;-) 
> 
> I'm not sure if this is what you understood by "Unbinding' in the 
> translation
> you used above.
> 
> Herman, I’d better finish here;-)
> 
> Sarah
> 
> * (the Pali is given in the footnote as anupaadaanaparinibbaana, which it 
> says
> the MA glosses as appacayaparinibbaana, ‘final Nibbana that has no condition
> ’,
> explaining that ‘upaadaana has two meanings: grasping (gaha.na), as in the
> usual passage on the four types of clinging; and condition (paccaya), as
> illustrated by this passage. The commentators explain ‘final Nibbana 
> without
> clinging’ either as the fruit of arahatship, because it cannot be grasped 
> by
> any of the four types of clinging; or as Nibbana the unconditioned, because 
> it
> has not arisen through any condition’)
> 
> 
> 


/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) 




	
9808

From: Sarah <sarahdhhk@y...> 
Date: Mon Dec 3, 2001 9:45pm
Subject: Re: [dsg] metta, kamma, social conscience and vipassana

 	
Dear Rob Ep,

> I think you make a lot of good points, and I would say that Dan's original
> points
> were good too, even though I had some reactions and additions......from my
> own
> point of view.

I understand well. I may not have had much (any?) experience of the despondency
and fear some have mentioned with regard to more understanding of anatta and
lack of control, but believe me, all these areas that you’ve discussed with Dan
and which I added to yesterday, have not been easy at all for me. I can talk
about kamma and vipaka and understand it quite well intellectually, but this is
mostly at a pretty superficial level. 

I also remember when I first used to stay with Khun Sujin, how I often
questioned whether understanding realities now was really enough and whether we
shouldn’t be doing more ‘out there’.....all of course, clinging to wrong views
with that idea of self and control again. No understanding of conditions when
one thinks like that. Still the ‘missionary zeal’ , the ‘social conscience’ the
‘fighting for human rights’ kept raising its head and even now there can be
strong attachment to the rights and wrongs in the world on a conceptual level.
These are the views that we attach to and which bring the disputes, dogmas and
so on.
> 
> What I mostly am saying is that I would want to avoid getting into an
> intellectual
> place where I can philosophize away daily conventional suffering by saying
> it's
> not 'real'. I know that no one here is doing that, but I think it's a good
> point
> anyway, at least to chew on. 

Again, of course, there’s ‘real’ on a conventional level and ‘real’ on an
absolute level. So often when we refer to suffering, on an absolute level,
isn’t it unpleasant bodily feeling, aversion and so on... These are very real
dhammas that can be understood. 

But I also certainly don't think that worrying
> about
> something that we're in no position to fix is a proper use of one's energy. 
> That
> would also be nothing but an intellectual exercise. 

There can also be a lot of attachment, I find, to fixing problems and wrongs,
usually with no understanding of realities or conditions.

> Finally, the real suffering is caused by delusion and ignorance, and on that
> I
> certainly agree.

We’re indeed fortunate to have a glimmer of the truth, even if it’s forgotten
most the time;-)

Always good chatting and yes, personally, I appreciate everyone’s participation
here, including yours;-))))

Sarah


	
9809

From: <hhofman@d...> 
Date: Mon Dec 3, 2001 10:00pm
Subject: The noble nine fold path

 	
Sarah and Mike,

The missing element in my study has obviously been....

right translation :-)

I got those quotes from accesstoinsight. Thanissaro Bhikkhu and 
Nyanaponika Thera. They both have This is all unreal or all this is 
unreal. 

Right view in my understanding is not a view that is held. It is 
seeing what is there when clinging (ie clinging to held views) 
ceases. I don't think dispensing with right view is possible.

What is the problem with the rendition: All this is unreal?


All the best

Herman





-- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah <sarahdhhk@y...> wrote:
> Dear Howard, Herman & Mike,
> 
> Against my better judgement and forsaking office and home chores 
(following yr
> example, Christine...), let me take a bite at the bait;-))
> 
> I'm looking at another translation of the Uraga Sutta by Ven 
Saddhatissa who
> was/is (I've lost touch) a very fine Pali scholar and monk. He 
summarises at
> the top: `the monk who discards all human passions is compared to a 
snake that
> casts its skin'.
> 
> I don't have the Pali, but can't imagine where the `This is all 
unreal' comes
> from in the other translation below. In V.Saddhatissa's 
translation. We read
> `gives up the Cycle of Existence' which of course is a reference to 
attaining
> arahatship. I'll just quote the first few stanzas:
> 
> "Uraga Sutta, The Snake's Skin
> 
> 1. He who gives up anger which has arisen, as the snake poison 
diffused in the
> body is removed by antidotes, that monk gives up the Cycle of 
Exostence as the
> snake sheds its old, decayed skin.
> 
> 2. He who has completely destroyed lust as one cuts off a lotus 
flower in a
> lake, that monk......
> 
> 3. He who has completely destroyed craving like drying up a once
> swiftly-flowing river.......
> 
> 4. He who has completely destroyed pride like a weak bridge of 
reeds swept away
> by a mightly flood....
> 
> 5. He who does not see any substantiality in forms of becoming as 
one does not
> find flowers on a fig tree...
> .................................................." <end quote>
> 
> 
> > hhofman@d... writes:
> > 
> > 
> > > SnI.1 Uraga Sutta
> > > 
> > > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind
> > > and knows about the world: "This is all unreal,"
> > > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond,
> > > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. 
> > > 
> > > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind,
> > > greedless he knows: "This is all unreal,"
> > > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond,
> > > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. 
> > > 
> > > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind,
> > > lust-free he knows: "This is all unreal,"
> > > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond,
> > > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. 
> > > 
> > > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind,
> > > hate-free he knows: "This is all unreal,"
> > > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond,
> > > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. 
> > > 
> > > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind,
> > > delusion-free he knows: "This is all unreal,"
> > > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond,
> > > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. 
> > > 
> > > SnIV.5 Paramatthaka Sutta
> > > 
> > =============================
> 
> In the last stanza I quote above, the reference to substantiality 
is I'm sure
> to self or atta.
> 
> When we read about the need to give up views, ritual, dogma and the 
like, the
> references are of course to wrong views (as described at length in 
many places
> such as in the Brahmajala Sutta) and not of course to right view or 
right
> understanding.
> 
> While we're on the snake theme, in the Alagaddupama sutta (Snake 
simile, MN22),
> there is a discussion about the 6 grounds for false views.:
> 
> `....he considers corporeality thus: "This is mine, this I am, 
this is my
> self"......
> 
> and so on for the other khandhas.
> 
> At the risk of being accused of serious nit-picking or entering 
into more
> proliferations, I'd also like to make a brief comment on Herman's 
quote here as
> well:
> 
> --- hhofman@d... wrote: > Dear Mike,
> > 
> > One of the things I got out of the passages I quoted was that the 
> > adherence to views (of any kind) is a roadblock to the 
achievement of 
> > the goal of Buddhist practice, which according to MN 24 Ratha-
vinta 
> > Sutta is formulated thus:
> > 
> > The holy life is lived under the Blessed One, my friend, for the 
sake 
> > of total Unbinding through lack of clinging.
> > 
> 
> In B.Bodhi' s translation, we read;
> 
> ` "Friend, it is for the sake of final Nibbana without clinging 
that the holy
> life is lived under the Blessed One." `* (see note at end of post, 
unless you
> prefer to filter it out;-) 
> 
> I'm not sure if this is what you understood by "Unbinding' in the 
translation
> you used above.
> 
> Herman, I'd better finish here;-)
> 
> Sarah
> 
> * (the Pali is given in the footnote as anupaadaanaparinibbaana, 
which it says
> the MA glosses as appacayaparinibbaana, `final Nibbana that has no 
condition',
> explaining that `upaadaana has two meanings: grasping (gaha.na), as 
in the
> usual passage on the four types of clinging; and condition 
(paccaya), as
> illustrated by this passage. The commentators explain `final 
Nibbana without
> clinging' either as the fruit of arahatship, because it cannot be 
grasped by
> any of the four types of clinging; or as Nibbana the unconditioned, 
because it
> has not arisen through any condition')
> 
> 
> 
	
9810

From: Sarah <sarahdhhk@y...> 
Date: Mon Dec 3, 2001 10:33pm
Subject: Re: [dsg] Intro to Vinaya Commentary - words of the Buddha? <3>

 	
Dear All,

Smp. = Samantapaasaadikaa. This is the commentary to the Vinaya by Buddhaghosa,

Baahiranidaana, The Inception of Discipline & the Vinaya Nidaana = the
introductory chapter to the Smp. 

This is the text, translated into English by N.A. Jayawickrama, Sacred Books,
that I’m quoting from. 

Just to recap, in the Baahianidaana, the introductory commentary to the Vinaya,
Buddhaghosa is establishing the authenticity of the vinaya, suttanta and
abhidhamma.
....................

Details of how the first 499 Arahants were selected with a place left for
Ananda were given last time.“...............Thereupon the monks themselves
begged of the Elder on Ananda’s behalf.......Thereupon Venerable Mahakassapa
selected Venerable Ananda as well. there were thus 5oo elders including that
vernerable one who was selected on the express wish of the monks....”
<end quote>
*********************

To continue, summarising from the Baahiranidaana now, It was decided that the
Council would be held in Rajagaha (Rajghir) because “Food is plentiful at
Rajagaha and lodgings are easy to obtain there.” It was decided to spend the
‘Rains-residence’ there and to rehearse all the Teachings. This decision, it
seems was made two weeks after the Buddha’s Parinibbana. There was another ‘one
and a half months of the summer’ left and so the Council took place exactly
2mths after the parinibbana. 

What was the reason for the haste in holding the First Council? Earlier there
is a passage from the Baahiranidaana which explains this and also refers to
parinibbana as ‘devoid of any material substratum’:

“.....When the Exalted One, the Lord of the world had passed away in the
element of Nibbana which is devoid of any material substratum, at the hour of
day-break on the full moon day of the month of Visakha between the twin sala
trees in the Upavattana sala-grove of the Mallas in Kusinara, having discharged
the functions of an Enlightened One, beginning with the turning of the Wheel of
the Dhamma, down to the conversion of the wandering ascetic Subhadda, the
Venerable Mahakassapa, the leading Elder among the 700,000 monks who had
assembled at the passing away in perfect Nibbana of the Exalted One,
recollecting after the lapse of seven days ....the words uttered by Subhadda
who had taken to the ascetic life in old age, namely, ‘Away with it friends,
grieve not, lament not, we are well rid of the Great Recluse who was wont to
tell us what was befitting and what was not and hence made our lives miserable;
but now we will do whatever we please and not do what we please not’; kindled
the enthusiasm among the Order of monks to bring about a rehearsal of the
Dhamma and Vinaya and further reflected, ‘It may be that the occasion would
arise for evil-minded monks to think that the Sacred-word is such, that its
Teacher is no more, to form factions and before long make the Good Teaching
disappear for ever.

‘ As long as the Dhamma and Vinaya endure, so long will the Sacred-word be
such that its Teacher has not passed into oblivion. And so has the Exalted One
said, “O Ananda, the Dhamma and the Vinaya that I have declared to you and laid
down before you (respectively) that itself will be your teacher after my
demise.’... “<end quote>

After deciding on the time and place, we have another glimpse into the
different accumulations of the Elders. MahaKassapa promptly made his way with
half the monks to Rajagaha, the Elder Anuruddha took with him the other half
and went by ‘a different route’. 

However, Ananda, took ‘the bowl and the robe of the Exalted One’, ‘attended by
a company of monks’ and went to Savatthi. There was great ‘lamentation’
wherever he went and it was particularly great when he arrived in Savatthi it
seems. He ‘consoled the populace with a discourse on the Dhamma dealing with
transciency’ and entered the Jeta Grove and the Fragrant Chamber there “which
used to be the dwelling of the Lord of Ten Powers, shifted the couch and seats,
dusted them, swept the Fragrant Chamber, threw away the rubbish of withered
flowers and garlands, brought back the couch and sets and placed them in their
former places and did all the ministrations which he would have done when the
Exalted one had been alive.” 

“Then the Elder took a purgative in milk on the following day in order to allay
the humours of his body which were disturbed on account of the excessively
sedentary life he had led from the time of the passing away of the Exalted One
in perfect nibbana, and remained indoors in the monastery...”

The next day he preached the Subhasutta (DN) and then ‘supervised the repairs
to the broken and shattered portions of the Jetavana Monastery’. When it was
close to the ‘Rains-residence’ , he went to Rajagaha,

With King Ajatasattu’s support, a pavilion was erected in Rajagaha ‘as though
surpassing the splendour of the royal palace’.

Surprisingly perhaps, some monks referring to Ananda said, ‘There is a monk
here in this assembly who goes about emanating the smell of raw flesh’. These
comments referred to his ‘Learner’ status and obviously were made with wisdom. 

The assembly was to meet the next day and Ananda ‘spent the greater part of the
night in mindfulness as to the body, and at day-break, descended from the
cankama-walk, entered the monastery, and inclined his body with the idea of
lying down. Scarcely had his feet left contact with the floor and before his
head had reached the pillow, during that interval his mind was released from
the cankers with no further clinging to the material substratum.........he
reflected...’I have over-exerted myself in my effort, in consequence of which
my mind was tending towards distraction. let me therefore abate the rigour of
my exertions.’ Saying so he came down from the cankama walk, washed his feet
standing at the place for washing the feet, entered the monastery, sat down on
his couch and stretched himself on it thinking and resting awhile.......the
Elder attained arahatship remaining in a position outside the four postures. 
Therefore, when it is asked what monk attained arahatship in this Dispensation
neither lying down, sitting, standing, nor pacing upa and down one should
answer that it is the Elder Ananda.” <end quote>

********************
Back to the discussion on Buddhaghosa and the writing of commentaries such as
this one I’ve been quoting from; Jayawickrama in the introduction says further:

‘Another reason given by Buddhaghosa for rewriting the commentaries in Pali is
his desire to secure the stability of the good Teaching
(saddhamma.t.thitikaama). This should be considered as the chief reason why
the Pali commentaries were written. In fact, Buddhaghosa came to Ceylon at a
very opportune time in the history of the Mahavihara. ......Buddhaghosa’s role
as editor and translator is quite clear. He was convinced of the purity of the
Mahavihara tradition and it was all that mattered to him so that he strove to
maintain it at all costs. His editorial activity was centred on the correct
interpretation of the Word of the Buddha from the Theravada point of
view......’ <end quote>

In another book I have by G.P. Malalsekera ‘The Pali Literature of Ceylon’, he
refers to Law’s ‘The Life and Work of Buddhaghosa’ (maybe, the book you have,
Nina?) in which he says the later ‘has a very interesting chapter on the origin
of these commentaries. He says that the need for an accurate interpretation of
the Buddha’s words, which formed the guiding principle of life and action of
the members of the Sangha, was felt from the very earliest days of the order. 
When the master was alive there was always the possibility of referring
disputed questions direct to him. But even during the madster’s lifetime - at
the Buddhist centres formed at various places under the leadership of one or
other of the famous disciples - discussions, friendly interviews, and
analytical expositions used to take place, and the raison d’etre of the
commentaries is to be traced to these discussions. Sometimes it happened that
accounts of these discussions were duly reported to the Teacher, and some of
them were approved by him, and he would then ask the monks to bear the
particular expositions in mind as the best that could have been given.....’
<end quote>

Please note that I’m merely doing a little research for my own interest and
maybe that of a few others here. I quite understand (and have no problem at
all) if these quotes from Buddhaghosa and the other comments are not acceptable
or of interest. 

Best wishes,

Sarah
=====================



	
9811

From: Christine Forsyth <cforsyth@v...> 
Date: Mon Dec 3, 2001 11:08pm
Subject: Re: [dsg] Intro to Vinaya Commentary - words of the Buddha? <3>

 	
Dear Sarah,

I find them very interesting - please keep posting...

metta,
Christine

--- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah <sarahdhhk@y...> wrote:
> Dear All, 
Smp. = Samantapaasaadikaa. This is the commentary to the Vinaya by 
Buddhaghosa,Baahiranidaana, The Inception of Discipline & the Vinaya 
Nidaana = the introductory chapter to the Smp. 
> This is the text, translated into English by N.A. Jayawickrama, 
Sacred Books, that I'm quoting from. 
> Just to recap, in the Baahianidaana, the introductory commentary to 
the Vinaya, Buddhaghosa is establishing the authenticity of the 
vinaya, suttanta and abhidhamma. 
> Please note that I'm merely doing a little research for my own 
interest and maybe that of a few others here. I quite understand (and 
have no problem at all) if these quotes from Buddhaghosa and the 
other comments are not acceptable or of interest. 
> Best wishes,
> Sarah
	
9812

From: <binh_anson@y...> 
Date: Mon Dec 3, 2001 11:26pm
Subject: Nina's book ... Re: Questions on the Paramis

 	
--- In dhammastudygroup@y..., robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote:

> Yes, I realise this. I am very lazy, that is the problem.
> I will get around to it eventually. If you wanted to put it on 
your 
> web-site you could take it and format it in your usual stylish way. 
> (And then I could copy yours back to mine).

-----------------------------------------------------------------

BA: I'll do it after the new year, when I return from the trip to 
South-east Asia.

Metta,
Binh
	
9813

From: Christine Forsyth <cforsyth@v...> 
Date: Mon Dec 3, 2001 11:39pm
Subject: Re: " Hello "

 	
Hi Weaver,

Welcome to dsg, I'm fairly new to buddhism too....Is reiki related in 
any way to Buddhism - I don't know much about it but have a feeling 
originally there was a connection?? What sort of reading are you 
doing on Buddhism, and have you found anything of particular interest?
Look forward to reading your posts,
metta,
Christine
--- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Weaver"<wordweaver@a...> wrote:
> 
> I am a new member, my name is Weaver and I have just recently 
become involved in a reiki healing group. I have received my level 1 
attunement which in turn has lead me in search of the Buddha. I look 
forward to reading your wise words. Thank you.
> 
> Weaver
	
9814

From: Sarah <sarahdhhk@y...> 
Date: Mon Dec 3, 2001 11:52pm
Subject: Re: [dsg] Intro to Vinaya Commentary - words of the Buddha? <3>

 	
Dear Christine,

likewise w/yr comments on Sammanaphala Sutta and paramis....we both love yr
style..(still laughing about those chicks...... and have you ever seen an
elephant having a lot of fun bathing itself and throwing water everywhere w/its
trunk....pure lobha;-)) ...I meant to add a few comments, but out of time.....

--- Christine Forsyth <cforsyth@v...> wrote: > Dear Sarah,
> 
> I find them very interesting - please keep posting...
> 
> metta,
> Christine



9815

From: Sarah <sarahdhhk@y...> 
Date: Tue Dec 4, 2001 0:00am
Subject: Re: [dsg] Intro to Vinaya Commentary - words of the Buddha? <3>

 	
p.s.

I nearly put a special note in for you and Rob K to take note where it
discussed Ananda's 'tidy housework' accumulations', but then I thought that
might be too pointed;-)).......

S.

--- Sarah <sarahdhhk@y...> wrote: > Dear Christine,
> 
> likewise w/yr comments on Sammanaphala Sutta and paramis....we both love yr
> style..(still laughing about those chicks...... and have you ever seen an
> elephant having a lot of fun bathing itself and throwing water everywhere
> w/its
> trunk....pure lobha;-)) ...I meant to add a few comments, but out of
> time.....
> 
> --- Christine Forsyth <cforsyth@v...> wrote: > Dear Sarah,
> > 
> > I find them very interesting - please keep posting...
> > 
> > metta,
> > Christine


	
9816

From: <upasaka@a...> 
Date: Tue Dec 4, 2001 0:41am
Subject: Re: [dsg] The noble nine fold path

 	
Hi, Herman -

In a message dated 12/4/01 1:04:08 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
hhofman@d... writes:


> I got those quotes from accesstoinsight. Thanissaro Bhikkhu and 
> Nyanaponika Thera. They both have This is all unreal or all this is 
> unreal. 
> 
===========================
Interesting that Nyanaponika Thera gave that formulation. He was a 
brilliant man, and an Abhidhammika. Robert K, do you have access to the Pali 
for the Uraga Sutta? If so, how would you translate it?

With metta,
Howard

/Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble 
in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a 
phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 




	
9817

From: Nina van Gorkom <nilo@e...> 
Date: Tue Dec 4, 2001 10:05am
Subject: Cambodia, Ch 13, no. 2

 	
Cambodia, ch 13, no. 2.

Pramesavara: There can only be patipatti, practice, when there is first
pariyatti, theoretical understanding that is correct. Is that right?

Sujin: We have to understand first what pariyatti is, the study and the
correct understanding of the characteristics of realities so that they are
known as dhammas, not self. From birth to death dhammas arise and fall away
but we take them all for self. When we study the theory, we begin to
understand that what we take for self are citta, cetasika and rúpa. However,
we should have a deeper understanding, we should realize them as dhamma. We
learn that the rebirth-consciousness, the ptatisandhi-citta, the first citta
of a new life, is an element that experiences, nåma dhåtu, different from
rúpa arising at the same time. Nobody knows the moment of his
rebirth-consciousness, but after that characteristics of rúpa dhammas and
nåma dhammas appear. If someone does not study, there is no awareness of
them, but if one studies and understands nåma and rúpa, there can be
conditions for the arising of sati, depending on the degree of
understanding. Sati does not arise when one clings to the view of a self who
wants to have sati. When someone really understands that there are only
dhammas, it is a condition for satipaììhåna to be aware of the
characteristic that is dhamma.

Pramesavara: Thus, we should begin with the study of the Dhamma, no matter
whether this is done by reading, listening or Dhamma discussions. We must
consider correctly the teachings in conformity with what the Buddha taught,
namely, that realities are not a being or person, that they are only
elements. We have to develop this understanding all the time.

Sujin: We should also understand that dhammas are not theory, that they are
not merely contained in the texts. We have to know that at each moment now
everything is dhamma. Studying dhamma is studying what is appearing at this
very moment. We should never forget this.

Pramesavara: Study should be based on something, because we cannot know the
truth just by ourselves. Study must be based on listening, reading and
considering what we read and heard.

Sujin: When we truly consider the dhamma while we are listening, we can
understand that the Dhamma we studied is here at this very moment. If we
understand this, it is a condition for sati to arise and to be aware,
because dhamma appears each moment; it appears at this very moment. Some
people separate pariyatti from paìipatti which they see as something that is
not part of their normal daily life, as something particular they have to be
engaged in. They forget that when they study the theory, pariyatti, they
should study with the aim to understand the reality that appears at this
moment. One should study in order to understand that any reality of this
moment is dhamma, be it seeing or hearing, but one never knew before that it
was dhamma. Thus, people should study with the aim to correctly understand
that nåma dhamma at this moment is the reality that experiences, the element
that experiences. Nåma dhamma is not theory, but there is nåma dhamma while
we are seeing now. One may have heard and understood that seeing at this
moment is nåma dhamma, because it is a reality that experiences something,
but the expression ³ the reality that experiences² is most difficult to
understand and to penetrate. When one sees, there is something that is
appearing through the eyes, but the reality of nåma that sees does not
appear. Only when its characteristic appears, it can be known as an element
or a kind of dhamma that is real.

When people have understood this, they know that what is appearing through
the eyes at this moment could not appear if there would not be nåma dhamma
that has arisen and sees that object. One can gradually understand that
seeing at this moment is dhamma. Therefore, when one studies the Dhamma one
studies with the purpose to have right understanding of the characteristics
of realities that are the truth of each moment in daily life. This can be a
condition for sati to arise and to be aware and in this way one will
gradually understand that when one sees at this moment, it is a reality, an
element that experiences, or when one hears, it is an element that
experiences sound.

**** 


	
9818

From: Christine Forsyth <cforsyth@v...> 
Date: Tue Dec 4, 2001 1:00pm
Subject: some more about metta

 	
Dear Sarah, and All,

Even though acknowledging (maybe... perhaps...probably...) that the 
Canon sees metta as being directed outwards, here are some more 
thoughts....
In a mail responding to my question, around the time I posted to this 
list, a recent teacher of mine sent a response - partly quoted below.
I don't attribute it to him by name, as I haven't yet received any 
other communication - he is travelling in India and is incommunicado 
most of the time. 
And as I sent him a virus last time, he may be wary of any post from 
me! :-) I like the phrase 'the living tradition'...
metta,
Christine

"Because of the difficulty that most people find in radiating these 
qualities
equally to all, the living tradition came up with a solution that 
prepares
us for the full practice. It ensures that our practice is established 
and
balanced, so that we don't become disheartened at the sheer scale of 
what
we are trying to accomplish. Most people find the approach beneficial.

I had a meeting with Bhikkhu Bodhi at the Forest Hermitage in Sri 
Lanka,
last year, and raised this very point. [metta - self or other 
directed] Aware that the canonical description
is always outwardly directed, I was concerned that I may be relying 
too
heavily on Buddhaghosa's 6th century sectional approach when initially
training others. Bhikkhu Bodhi's response was that he teaches metta in
exactly the same way - with oneself first - because it works.
<SNIP>
The over-riding concern is that the training we
are undertaking works in the optimal way for each of us. All of the 
methods
we are using aim at the canonical ideal, and that is why they have 
been
present in the tradition for so many centuries.

The very few people who can immediately radiate any of these 
qualities to
all, in a boundless way, without favouring or neglecting any sentient 
being,
are already fairly accomplished in the brahmaviharas. They should bask
in that beautiful state and continue to work in it! Even the Buddha 
continued
to practice the brahmaviharas after his enlightenment. The rest of us 
usually
need to work with one of the skilful means that the tradition has 
devised
to get us nearer to that point. How speedily this comes about depends 
on
our past actions and the amount of energy we devote to the task. Many 
people
accomplish this in a year or two of steady work, some even sooner.

We must always remember that this is not a religion of the book: it 
is a
living tradition that relies on more than what is recorded in the 
texts.
It responds to the emerging needs of practitioners who sincerely wish 
to
arrive at the goal that the Buddha outlined. Anything that works to 
bring
an individual nearer to acquiring the skills that the Buddha deemed 
necessary
for awakening is a legitimate part of the Buddhist path. The texts 
offer
splendid advice and a reference point against which we can check for 
wilfull
distortions, but this does not preclude innovations in training 
practices
(even 6th century ones) providing that their aim is consonant with the
teaching of the Buddha.

What others have written about the need to overcome any form of self-
hatred
in order to practice metta, etc., is also a pressing argument for the 
inclusion
of the preliminary reflection on oneself. As always, there is the need
for balance: we don't want to enshrine Self (because this would be 
wrong
understanding according to the Dhamma), but neither do we want to 
neglect
our practical and emotional needs whilst we are treading this path."
	
9819

From: Sarah <sarahdhhk@y...> 
Date: Tue Dec 4, 2001 9:32pm
Subject: Re: [dsg] The noble nine fold path

 	
Dear Herman,

This time perhaps it’s me being dense, but I can’t quite see where your subject
heading ‘The Noble Ninefold Path’ comes from..;-)

--- hhofman@d... wrote: > Sarah and Mike,
> 
> The missing element in my study has obviously been....
> 
> right translation :-)

Of course, as we all know very well, it is the understanding of dhammas rather
than any translation that is important. However, if we’re relying on the Suttas
and the Sutta translations available to understand the Buddha’s word, the
translation does take on some significance, don’t you think? Often too, it
reflects the understanding of the Pali and Teachings by the translator too.
> 
> I got those quotes from accesstoinsight. Thanissaro Bhikkhu and 
> Nyanaponika Thera. They both have This is all unreal or all this is 
> unreal. 
> 
> Right view in my understanding is not a view that is held. It is 
> seeing what is there when clinging (ie clinging to held views) 
> ceases. I don't think dispensing with right view is possible.

Indeed, rather than dispensing with it, it needs to be developed...

> What is the problem with the rendition: All this is unreal?

The reason I looked at another translation was because, to be honest, I didn’t
understand what the meaning was. What is unreal? Is this really an accurate
translation of the Pali, I wonder?

> > > > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind
> > > > and knows about the world: "This is all unreal,"
> > > > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond,
> > > > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. 

Again, I may just be slow, but the following translation I gave for the same
verse is immediately comprehensible to me and concords with the Pali Canon as I
understand it:

> > 1. He who gives up anger which has arisen, as the snake poison 
> diffused in the
> > body is removed by antidotes, that monk gives up the Cycle of 
> Existence as the
> > snake sheds its old, decayed skin.

As I’ve mentioned before, I think it’s wonderful to have quick internet access
to the Suttas, but, I can’t help hoping that some of the other translations
will be available on-line soon.

Please know that these comments are not meant as any criticism of the hard work
that has gone into putting these texts on line in order to spread the Dhamma.
But as you asked.....

Best wishes,

Sarah


	
9820

From: Sarah <sarahdhhk@y...> 
Date: Tue Dec 4, 2001 9:54pm
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: " Hello "

 	
Dear Weaver,

May I add a welcome to Christine's kind words. 

It's always interesting to hear what leads people to Buddhism and like
christine, I look forward to hearing any more you may wish to share. Where do
you live?

I also think that reiki is a very valuable healing tool, but wasn't aware of
the connection with buddhism.

Kind regards,

Sarah

--- Christine Forsyth <cforsyth@v...> wrote: > Hi Weaver,
> 
> Welcome to dsg, I'm fairly new to buddhism too....Is reiki related in 
> any way to Buddhism - I don't know much about it but have a feeling 
> originally there was a connection?? What sort of reading are you 
> doing on Buddhism, and have you found anything of particular interest?
> Look forward to reading your posts,
> metta,
> Christine
> --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Weaver"<wordweaver@a...> wrote:
> > 
> > I am a new member, my name is Weaver and I have just recently 
> become involved in a reiki healing group. I have received my level 1 
> attunement which in turn has lead me in search of the Buddha. I look 
> forward to reading your wise words. Thank you.
> > 
> > Weaver


	
9821

From: rjkjp <rjkjp@y...> 
Date: Tue Dec 4, 2001 10:04pm
Subject: Re: [dsg] The noble nine fold path

 	
--- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote:
> Hi, Herman -
> 
> In a message dated 12/4/01 1:04:08 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
> hhofman@d... writes:
> 
> 
> > I got those quotes from accesstoinsight. Thanissaro Bhikkhu and 
> > Nyanaponika Thera. They both have This is all unreal or all this 
is 
> > unreal. 
> > 
> ===========================
> Interesting that Nyanaponika Thera gave that formulation. He 
was a 
> brilliant man, and an Abhidhammika. Robert K, do you have access to 
the Pali 
> for the Uraga Sutta? If so, how would you translate it?
> 
> With metta,
> Howard
> 
> ++++++++

Dear Howard,
I'm flattered that you think any translation i make would be 
acceptable. Unfortunately my pali is very weak and I would be just 
relying on the Pali-English dictionary and my own intuition; not 
reliable I'm afraid.
If Herman gives us the url's we can all look at these translations, 
though.
Even if the best translation does turn out to be 'unreal' I think 
this shouldn't be seized on without regard to the rest of the 
Tipitaka. Sometimes rupa and the khandas are described as void 
(sunna) false(tuccha),asara(essenceless) or compared with foam or a 
mirage etc. These descriptions assist us in contemplating the khandas 
so as to turn away from them, it does not mean that the khandas are 
imaginary.
robert k.
	
9822

From: Sarah <sarahdhhk@y...> 
Date: Tue Dec 4, 2001 10:33pm
Subject: Re: [dsg] Questions on the Paramis

 	
Hi Christine,

I’m glad Rob K has answered one question anyway;-)

--- Christine Forsyth <cforsyth@v...> wrote: > Dear all,
> 
> Against my better judgment I took a tiny peek at 'A Treatise on the 
> Paramis' - just to see what I was 'saving for a few more weeks' - 
> not a wise move.....But I have restricted myself to the first 20 
> pages...(I hope). 

I’m actually not familiar with this work. Do you have a link or reference you
can give?

> Is this addiction to Dhamma, greed? Housework, other study, etc. get 
> put aside immediately I have a choice between tasks and studying the 
> Teachings...........How do I stop?

Actually Rob answered this one too;-)

> If anyone has a little time, could I pose a few other questions 
> please?
> 
> Who was Acariya Dhammapala, and when did he live?

He lived in Sri Lanka around the time or soon after Buddhaghosa (not sure
anyone has the exact dates, around AD 600, I think). He is believed to have
been a Tamil by race. As Rob said, he is the most famous commentator after
Buddhaghosa in the Theravadan Teachings and wrote 14 commentaries on the texts
Buddhaghosa had left.

> Bhikkhu Bodhi says in his introduction that 'What distinguishes the 
> supreme bodhisattva from aspirants in the other two vehicles 
> (paccekabuddhas or disciples) is the degree to which the paramis must 
> be cultivated and the length of time they must be pursued.'
> Under the heading "What is their condition" 
> Quote: 'The condition of the paramis is, firstly, the great 
> aspiration (abhinihara). This is the aspiration supported by the 
> eight qualifications. <snip> The eight qualifications through which 
> the aspiration succeeds are: the human state, the male sex, the 
> cause, the sight of the Master, the going forth, the achievement of 
> noble qualities, extreme dedication and strong desire.'
> Question: Was it the Buddha who said "This is impossible, bhikkhus, 
> this cannot come to pass, that a woman might become a perfectly 
> enlightened Buddha"? The male sex <sigh> - I'm O.K. about 
> this......I'm coming around to realising gender isn't that important, 
> that I've probably been either/or a million times. (What happened 
> to 'In this very life'? I seem to be losing it on the way.).

This is all as I’ve read and u’stood. Some may say this is ‘unfair’, but then
many things in life seem ‘unfair’ <as Rob Ep and Erik have mentioned..oops;-)
or as my students always tell me ...> Again the Buddha is merely describing the
way they are, I think.


> Question: The mention of "the sight of the Master" as a necessary 
> precondition to making an aspiration to be a Bodhisattva.......Is 
> this widely known? or have I misunderstood? I am acquainted with 
> some meditators in other traditions, male and female, who seem to 
> have missed these points, and have made a Bodhisattva vow....perhaps 
> I'm on the wrong track.......

I’ve also read about the aspiration and think it’s well documented in the
texts.Sorry, i’ll have to leave the references to others. ?Jataka Stoies ?Birth
Stories of 10 Bodhisattas.....I’ll maybe look later..

> Quote: "Possessions (!) such as fields, land, bullion, gold, cattle, 
> buffaloes, slaves, children, wives, etc., bring tremendous harm to 
> those who become attached to them. 
<snip>
> Comment: (In discussing the Perfection of Giving I would have hoped 
> that Bhikkhu Bodhi could have made a note about the different view 
> held of women in those days before so much effort was put in to 
> raising people's consciousness .......)
> Again - I don't mind being further down the list than land and gold - 
> but cattle and buffaloes!!! 

Look at it this way, Christine....perhaps the relinquishing of land, gold,
cattle and buffaloes, takes place before the relinquishing of women.....;-)

> Quote: "Since there are goods, and beggars have come, not to give 
> them something would be a great deception on my part." And: "How can 
> I relinquish my own life and limbs to those who ask for them?" 
> Question: Does this mean he is happily a victim of assault, torture 
> and murder? Could this be regarded as incitement? Where is the 
> kamma? Does the perpetrator inherit the fruits of the action if the 
> victim sort of 'donated' himself?

Could we say that if already by conditions he is the victim or assault or
toture or murder, then what about the metta or generosity or wholesome state of
mind at that time? Oc course, he would try to prevent others from committing
akusala kamma patha, but this isn’t always possible.

> Quote: "He should arouse a desire to give things away without concern 
> by reflecting: "Good returns to the one who gives without his 
> concern, just as the boomerang returns to the one who threw it 
> without his concern." 
> Question: Boomerang? Is this really the correct word? I have 
> mentioned it to the Indigenous Health Workers at the hospital - they 
> are doubting but intrigued......they believed that the 'returning' 
> boomerang was an invention of their people (Australian Aboriginal and 
> Torres Strait Islanders), - though they concede 'non-returning' 
> hunting boomerangs were known in Europe as well.......

Well, at least it encouraged a useful discussion at the hospital;-) Jon
mentioned that he’d read that one translator (Bodhi?) wasn’t sure how to
translate a particular term when he used boomerang......at least you guys
should feel at home...

> Quote: "Attachment to external objects is like the bathing of an 
> elephant; therefore you should not be attached to anything."
> Question: I find the meaning a little obscure, can someone 
> elucidate? I suppose if it was a 'very very large elephant' it could 
> mean something like 'never-ending'?

lobha, lobha, I think, as mentioned..

> Quote: "You should always be well behaved, safeguarding your virtue 
> perfectly, more carefully than a hen safeguarding its eggs." 
> Comment: I should hope so....With respect, the author must never have 
> kept fowls.....as a victor in many a battle with a 'clucky' hen over 
> her eggs in the past, with only slight battle wounds, I feel a 
> stronger simile could have been used........though he does say 'more 
> carefully'...... And the hen does make a lot of noise during the 
> encounter. Though she settles down immediately if the encounter 
> happens at night, and she is fooled by leaving one egg for her 
> to 'brood'. Better not to extend the simile that far? :-)

;-)))))))))

> Quote: "I am just as much the cause as he for the wrong on account of 
> which this suffering has arisen."
> Comment: Hmmm....I understand this theoretically, but when I am with 
> a victim of rape, or other assault the meaning seems far 
> away.......And I wonder how this impacts on the general tendency to 
> blame the victim....."It's their kamma".
> Question: "Should we help victims? Isn't it in the same category as 
> not agreeing with euthanasia, because the person only has to work out 
> their kamma in yet another rebirth if they shorten their suffering in 
> this life.? Wrong track?

very glad, Rob K chose this point to answer;-)

> Quote: "All these beings are watched over by the Buddha as if they 
> were his own dear children."
> Question: 'Just where does the Buddha exist when he is 'watching over 
> these beings? '..........

During his life he was able to read or understand any minds......also maybe
‘watched over’ really means ‘be concerned for’...I’d like to know the Pali...

> Sorry - just realised that this is getting too long - so I'll stop 
> now.

Oh dear, just beginning to enjoy this...;-)

Christine, I know you won't take my comments here too seriously. I haven't seen
the text and I'm just having a little fun.

Look f/w to more,
Sarah




	
9823

From: Robert Epstein <epsteinrob@Y...> 
Date: Tue Dec 4, 2001 10:55pm
Subject: Re: [dsg] Parinibbana Subcommentary

 	
--- upasaka@a... wrote:

> ============================
> Thank you for all the foregoing detailed analysis. It strikes me from 
> that analysis, that a possible meaning for 'apannattikabhaavo' might be 
> "nonconceptual state of being". Is not one meaning of 'pa~n~nati' that of 
> "concept"? If this is a possible reading, then it is possible that 
> parinibbana may be a state not of "undefined reality" but, rather, a 
> nonconceptual state of being, a state of direct knowing, unmediated by 
> concept. What do you think?
> 
> With metta,
> Howard

I of course like this idea, and will wait with you to hear of the possibility of
this interpretation.

Robert Ep.



	
9824

From: Sarah <sarahdhhk@y...> 
Date: Tue Dec 4, 2001 11:14pm
Subject: Re: [dsg] some more about metta

 	
Dear Christine,

Me again!

This post is a little harder for me to respond to as I’m always nervous about
making any comments that may be seen as critical of any teacher or writing
(unless someone writes directly to the list and then it’s ‘fair game’).

Actually, we’d be very pleased if your recent teacher were to join us here for
further discussion. Of course we’d also be extremely honoured if B.Bodhi were
to join us but we realise he’s very busy writing already and has limited
electricity and computer use at the Forest Hermitage.

There are just a few general points I’d like to comment on (briefly I hope):

1. I think it is important to establish what the Canon teaches as this is the
record and ‘umpire’ of the Teachings here. It seems that (reluctantly) in the
texts, other beings are accepted as being the objects of metta accordingly.

2. Many approaches, practices and techniques are followed and found to be
useful by many teachers and students. In order for these to be considered as
the Buddha’s Teachings, however, I think reference needs to be found. 

3. Furthermore, I don’t understand the ancient commentators, including
Buddhaghosa, to suggest either that metta should be directed to oneself. Was a
training practice of this kind really introduced at this time I wonder?

4. I think we all agree that ‘radiating metta in a boundless way’ is suggestive
of a very high level of samatha indeed. This doesn’t mean there cannot be a
start to developing metta now, when there are opportunities, to those around
us. As usual, understanding is the key.

5. if we have the idea of wishing to develop more metta or being the person
with lots of metta, this is the result of attachment. Attachment cannot lead
directly to the development of wholesome states. 

6. I don’t understand there to be a time frame for accomplishing any
development of wholesomeness. Are we concerned about results?

7. Whenever there is an idea of ‘doing’ or ‘working’ or ‘undertaking’ or
‘acquiring skills’, I think it’s useful to consider whether there is an idea of
self and control again.

8. When there is any concern to get rid of ‘hatred’, is there any detachment
from conditioned realities at that time?

Christine, I understand your viewpoint well and indeed was ‘trained’ in a
similar manner with seeimingly useful results. I offer these comments only for
consideration purposes. I fear I’ve already repeated myself too often and am
probably just being a bore at this stage;-)

metta,
Sarah

p.s. KenO, thank you for your helpful references and quotes on metta as well,
which I appreciated. 

Christine Forsyth <cforsyth@v...> wrote: > Dear Sarah, and All,
> 
> Even though acknowledging (maybe... perhaps...probably...) that the 
> Canon sees metta as being directed outwards, here are some more 
> thoughts....
> In a mail responding to my question, around the time I posted to this 
> list, a recent teacher of mine sent a response - partly quoted below.
> I don't attribute it to him by name, as I haven't yet received any 
> other communication - he is travelling in India and is incommunicado 
> most of the time. 
> And as I sent him a virus last time, he may be wary of any post from 
> me! :-) I like the phrase 'the living tradition'...
> metta,
> Christine

<snip for brevity only>

	
9825

From: Sarah <sarahdhhk@y...> 
Date: Tue Dec 4, 2001 11:31pm
Subject: characteristic of hardness

 	
Dear Rob Ep and Howard,

I believe you were having a useful discussion on understanding the
characteristic or nature of ‘hardness’. I’ve just been catching up on Nina’s
recent drafts of her translations from Cambodia. The following extract seemed
very pertinent to your discussion and I wondered if you had any further
comments.

<Cambodia Ch 12, no 3, Sujin speaking>
>......................................................................Understanding,
although it is
> still very slight, can begin to realize that there are dhammas, each with
> their own characteristic, and at such moments there is no need to think of
> them or to speak about them. There can be understanding of the
> characteristic of hardness that appears at such a moment, it can be realized
> as a kind of dhamma that has the characteristic of hardness.
> 
> When hardness appears, there are two kinds of realities: hardness and the
> experience of hardness. The moment of sati and of paññå that gradually
> begins to understand realities, is very short, because such a moment arises
> and then falls away extremely rapidly. It is impossible that is immediately
> clear understanding of realities. There can gradually be awareness and more
> understanding of the characteristic which experiences, of the reality which
> experiences hardness; there will be more understanding of that
> characteristic as it really is. This is satipatthåna, but not yet of the
> level of pativedha, the direct realization of the truth. One only begins to
> develop correct understanding of the characteristics of realities we used to
> take for people, for beings, for this or that thing. When sati arises and is
> aware of what appears, one begins to understand that there are only
> different dhammas, each with their own characteristic, and that this is
> reality. When sati arises people will know when they are forgetful of
> realities and when there is sati. Knowing the difference between the moment
> of sati and the moment of forgetfulness is the beginning level of its
> development, and people can only know this themselves. Other people cannot
> know with regard to someone else what sati is aware of, whether sati arises
> or not. Each person can only know this for himself.
> **** 


	
9826

From: Robert Epstein <epsteinrob@Y...> 
Date: Tue Dec 4, 2001 11:37pm
Subject: Re: [dsg] metta, kamma, social conscience and vipassana

 	
Dear Sarah,
Thanks for your comments. I think it's very worthwhile to see that we don't have
control over conditions and to see the insubstantial nature of the things we want
to hold onto or change. I would only add that I don't see any reason why we can't
try to maintain this perspective while being available for the opportunities to
end suffering, and to be committed to end suffering in all its forms, due to all
the forms of ignorance that manifest in the world. 

Lately I have really found a kind of comfort in starting to see directly that the
things that happen to me aren't by chance. Instead of wishing things were
different I see that karma and conditions are causing things to happen. It is
actually a relief to not be responsible on that level, but to be responsible to
stay aware instead so that new akusala conditions are lessened to some degree. I
have a kind of hope that sometime in the future maybe the tide of conditions will
turn and things will be 'better', not because of chance or some sort of reward,
but only because negative conditions have not been created as much. And that this
leads in the direction of eliminating all causal conditions. It's an interesting
perspective. In the meantime, if my child cries, I pick her up.

Best Regards,
Robert Ep.

======================================


--- Sarah <sarahdhhk@y...> wrote:
> Dear Rob Ep,
> 
> > I think you make a lot of good points, and I would say that Dan's original
> > points
> > were good too, even though I had some reactions and additions......from my
> > own
> > point of view.
> 
> I understand well. I may not have had much (any?) experience of the despondency
> and fear some have mentioned with regard to more understanding of anatta and
> lack of control, but believe me, all these areas that you’ve discussed with Dan
> and which I added to yesterday, have not been easy at all for me. I can talk
> about kamma and vipaka and understand it quite well intellectually, but this is
> mostly at a pretty superficial level. 
> 
> I also remember when I first used to stay with Khun Sujin, how I often
> questioned whether understanding realities now was really enough and whether we
> shouldn’t be doing more ‘out there’.....all of course, clinging to wrong views
> with that idea of self and control again. No understanding of conditions when
> one thinks like that. Still the ‘missionary zeal’ , the ‘social conscience’ the
> ‘fighting for human rights’ kept raising its head and even now there can be
> strong attachment to the rights and wrongs in the world on a conceptual level.
> These are the views that we attach to and which bring the disputes, dogmas and
> so on.
> > 
> > What I mostly am saying is that I would want to avoid getting into an
> > intellectual
> > place where I can philosophize away daily conventional suffering by saying
> > it's
> > not 'real'. I know that no one here is doing that, but I think it's a good
> > point
> > anyway, at least to chew on. 
> 
> Again, of course, there’s ‘real’ on a conventional level and ‘real’ on an
> absolute level. So often when we refer to suffering, on an absolute level,
> isn’t it unpleasant bodily feeling, aversion and so on... These are very real
> dhammas that can be understood. 
> 
> But I also certainly don't think that worrying
> > about
> > something that we're in no position to fix is a proper use of one's energy. 
> > That
> > would also be nothing but an intellectual exercise. 
> 
> There can also be a lot of attachment, I find, to fixing problems and wrongs,
> usually with no understanding of realities or conditions.
> 
> > Finally, the real suffering is caused by delusion and ignorance, and on that
> > I
> > certainly agree.
> 
> We’re indeed fortunate to have a glimmer of the truth, even if it’s forgotten
> most the time;-)
> 
> Always good chatting and yes, personally, I appreciate everyone’s participation
> here, including yours;-))))
> 
> Sarah


	
9827

From: rjkjp <rjkjp@y...> 
Date: Tue Dec 4, 2001 11:39pm
Subject: Robert Eddison

 	
Dear group,
I just received an email from Robert Eddison addressed to Sarah, Jon 
and myself.
You might recall he wrote several weeks ago that he was recovering 
from an illness (he thought). 
Very briefly: He had thought it was a severe case of flu but soon 
after he wrote the symptoms worsened and he went into coma - it was 
actually meningitis. He is very slowly recovering from this grave 
illness but cannot write without assistance(he can't touch type) and 
has impaired vision which means he can only read a little everyday 
(by increasing the font size to 72points).
He writes of his appreciation of the Dhamma and the discussions here, 
but won't be able to actively participate for sometime.
I much respect his understanding and wish him well in this hard time.
robert k.
	
9828

From: Sarah <sarahdhhk@y...> 
Date: Wed Dec 5, 2001 0:01am
Subject: Re: [dsg] Interesting sutta

 	
Hi Dan,

I've just read the Parivimamsanasutta (Thorough Investigation), SN11,12,51
which you quoted from before.

Just to say I appreciate your comments and useful questions which I've just
re-read. When there is a little understanding of not-self and conditions, the
suttas take on a 'new life' I believe.

thanks for your kind comments too.

Sarah


--- dalthorp@o... wrote: 

>......... Then, the language of the Satipatthana sutta mirrors those 
> suttas that are obvious descriptions and seems much more akin to 
> descriptions of types of understanding at reasonably deep levels 
> (though mostly not at a level of an arahant) than to "practices" 
> aimed at developing understanding. The Parivimamsana sutta suggests 
> that the development of wisdom isn't so much a matter of training the 
> mind to mimic the descriptions of wise mind, but more a matter of 
> thorough investigation of the moment. With proper investigation, 
> understanding will develop, perhaps slowly but develop nonetheless. 

<snip>



	
9829

From: ellaruthau <cforsyth@v...> 
Date: Wed Dec 5, 2001 0:11am
Subject: Re: puppets, mara, and concentration (pt 1)

 	
Dear Robert,and All,

Sorry, anatta again....thinking about the puppet quotes, they 
illustrate the impermanence of the body very well to me.... and raise 
issues of who or what is in control..... every puppet is owned by a 
puppet-master ...someone who pulls the strings.....makes it act, - 
controls it.
Equating the body with an arrow (shaft) also brings to mind that 
there is an 'archer', who fits the arrow, and releases the bow-
string, - aims it.
I have also tried to understand this by thinking the 'life force' as 
the combination of engine and petrol in a car, with the mind as the 
ignition key......but, "whose" is the hand that turns the key in the 
car?.... - makes it move.
The ship is the one I like best, because an impersonal set of
conditions creates weather systems, and causes the wind that moves the
ship.....but then, . 'Something' decides direction and steers it.

After further thinking about puppets, dolls, archers, and ships, and 
reading a little more, I feel part of the problem I am having with 
Anatta is that the entire Western culture (literature, painting, 
poetry, science, religion, law, politics) is threaded through with 
the belief that there is a body which is impermanent and dies, 
plus 'something' immaterial, the soul, which is capable of living 
apart from the body after the bodys' death.( If this is not so, it
is certainly going to affect the pleasure of reading - perhaps 
literature will lose some of its richness .....God has already gone, 
but imagine Donne without soul and death ....)

When I look at a dead body, whether a baby or an aged person, there 
is no problem with realising that the body is Not-Self. But the 
distinct impression made (even without signs of disease or deliberate 
damage) is that 'something' has gone, is missing......the 'something' 
that vitalised the body. Just as in part of your quote 'but by means 
of their working together, this mental and bodily combination may 
move about, stand up, and appear full of life and activity." With a 
corpse, the body is still there, the 'something' (the mental part?) 
is absent......
But the Buddha didn't think of anything as separate or separable from 
the body. Or did he?

Looking at the Anatta-lakkhana Sutta (The Not-Self Characteristic) 
sort of from the flip side, could it be inferred that the Buddha is 
saying that for'something' to be considered as Self it would :
1. Not lead to affliction
2. Obey the person of whom it is the Self
3. have to be permanent i.e. Pleasant, permanent, not 
subject to change.

And I've just found the brick wall.....A gate somewhere, maybe?

metta,
Christine

--- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Kirkpatrick 
<robertkirkpatrick@r...> 
> Robert: Absolutely Christine. The suttas 'are heavy with
> condensed meaning'! I like puppet too. Here are some more
> quotes :
> From the VisuddhiMagga, chap. xi. And it is when the body is
> impelled by the wind element that it performs its four functions
> of walking, standing, sitting, or lying-down, or draws in and
> stretches out its arms, or moves its hands and its feet. Thus
> does this machine made of the four elements move like a puppet,
> and deceives all foolish people with its femininity,
> masculinity, etc"endquote.
> 
> From majjhima nikaya 82 p683 Bodhi
> Behold a puppet here pranked out,
> a body built from sores,
> sick, an object of concern, where no stabilty abides
> 
> http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/dic3_n.htm
> "Just as a wooden puppet though unsubstantial, lifeless and
> inactive may by means of pulling strings be made to move about,
> stand up, and appear full of life and activity; just so are mind
> and body, as such, something empty, lifeless and inactive; but
> by means of their mutual working together, this mental and
> bodily combination may move about, stand up, and appear full of
> life and activity."
> 
> from the Satipatthana sutta atthakatta (sections on modes of
> deportment)"Just as a ship goes on by winds impelled,
> Just as a shaft goes by the bowstring's force,
> So goes this body in its forward course
> Full driven by the vibrant thrust of air.
> As to the puppet's back the dodge-thread's tied
> So to the body-doll the mind is joined
> And pulled by that the body moves, stands, sits.
> Where is the living being that can stand,
> Or walk, by force of its own inner strength,
> Without conditions that give it support? "
> 
> ++++++++++ 
> Christine: I wonder....in Buddhism, is Mara believed to be real?
> or a projection 
> of our own desires and impulses? 
> ++++++++++++++
> 
> There are five kinds of Mara: the devaputta Mara (who confronted
> Sela), the kilesa(defilements), kamma formations, Death Mara,
> and the five aggregates Mara. I haven't met the first one (in
> this life). The last one, the khandas, is one we cling to and
> love but the khandas are like murderers waiting for the right
> time to strike. One day they will and we will die; better to see
> the danger of them now and so lessen clinging to them.
> ++++++++++++
>
	
9830

From: Sarah <sarahdhhk@y...> 
Date: Wed Dec 5, 2001 0:19am
Subject: Seeing - Ken O

 	
Dear Ken O,

I thought of you and our discussion as I read this extract from <Cambodia ch12,
no 4>:

> When we are seeing and satipatthåna does not arise, there is
> no way of knowing that seeing is an element or reality that experiences
> something; this characteristic is real, and it does not have shape or form.
> We should consider the reality that is the element which experiences
> something: there is no rúpa that is blended or mixed with it. Then it will
> be clear that the characteristic of the element that experiences is
> penetrated through the mind-door. Such a moment is different from the
> moments that everything seems to appear together, such as visible object
> that seems to appear together with seeing. 

Any comments?

The following comments about developing sati naturally were from the same
segment. I appreciate the reminders about becoming 'detached' from realities.
Don't we wish to have more sati or metta and to have less dosa?

Best wishes,

Sarah

>....Sati can be aware , and we should not think it too difficult or
> impossible. People may doubt whether they can be aware in this life, but
> that is just thinking. When there are conditions for the arising of sati it
> can arise. One may think that sati may only arise after ten years or in the
> next life, but that is useless. Sati is dependent on conditions, just like
> hearing and other realities: when there are conditions for hearing, it must
> arise; and when there are conditions for seeing it must arise. Even so, when
> there are conditions for the arising of sammå-sati, it arises. Therefore, we
> should correctly understand that sati can arise naturally.
> 
> Each dhamma arises naturally. It is not natural if someone because of his
> ignorance wishes for the arising again of sati. We should not forget that
> paññå is developed with the aim to become detached. Sati arises and then
> falls away, this is normal. Why does one wish for its arising again?
> Whenever there are conditions sati will arise. We should clearly understand
> that all realities appearing at this moment do so because there are
> conditions for their arising. If someone really understands this, he will
> not worry. Lobha will arise because there are conditions for its arising.
> Dosa will arise because there are conditions for its arising. Whatever
> reality arises must fall away again, and we cannot do anything else but
> study with sati sampajaññå, clear comprehension, the realities that arise
> and fall away. 

	
9831

From: Sarah <sarahdhhk@y...> 
Date: Wed Dec 5, 2001 0:38am
Subject: Re: [dsg] metta, kamma, social conscience and vipassana

 	
Dear Rob Ep,

--- Robert Epstein <epsteinrob@Y...> wrote: > Dear Sarah,
> Thanks for your comments. I think it's very worthwhile to see that we don't
> have
> control over conditions and to see the insubstantial nature of the things we
> want
> to hold onto or change. I would only add that I don't see any reason why we
> can't
> try to maintain this perspective while being available for the opportunities
> to
> ent suffering, and to be committed to end suffering in all its forms, due to
> all
> the forms of ignorance that manifest in the world.

I agree if I can that we should follow any opportunity to develop all kinds of
wholesome states and deeds......However, to be 'committed to end suffering in
all its forms' sounds like a pretty tall order.....even the Buddha couldn't
accomplish that;-) 

> Lately I have really found a kind of comfort in starting to see directly that
> the
> things that happen to me aren't by chance. Instead of wishing things were
> different I see that karma and conditions are causing things to happen. It
> is
> actually a relief to not be responsible on that level,

Exactly so, this is why the devleopment of understanding should be 'light'
rather than 'heavy' or leading to despondency..

> but to be responsible
> to
> stay aware instead so that new akusala conditions are lessened to some
> degree. I
> have a kind of hope that sometime in the future maybe the tide of conditions
> will
> turn and things will be 'better', not because of chance or some sort of
> reward,
> but only because negative conditions have not been created as much.

Rather than hope or think about future conditions, isn't it more useful to
develop understanding with detachment....less minding, less hoping...

> And that
> this
> leads in the direction of eliminating all causal conditions. It's an
> interesting
> perspective. 

Yes...conditions are so very complicated....who knows what kamma and other
conditions will brring what results at any time for anyone?

>In the meantime, if my child cries, I pick her up.

Good! Not to do so would be wrong view or wrong understanding that 'there's no
use doing anything' or sth along those lines.....

And good to chat again.....now I need to attend to 'my patient' (Jon's just
come home after some minor surgery on his head.....)

Sarah

	
9832

From: Robert Epstein <epsteinrob@Y...> 
Date: Wed Dec 5, 2001 0:57am
Subject: Re: [dsg] metta, kamma, social conscience and vipassana

 	
--- Sarah <sarahdhhk@y...> wrote:

> And good to chat again.....now I need to attend to 'my patient' (Jon's just
> come home after some minor surgery on his head.....)

Oh geez, talk about arising conditions. 
I'm glad that neither of us takes our family members to be 'merely illusions'. 
<g>
And please wish him the best!

Regards,
Robert Ep.



	
9833

From: jaranoh <jaranoh@y...> 
Date: Wed Dec 5, 2001 1:08am
Subject: Re: Cambodia, Ch 13, no. 2: thank you Nina.

 	
Hello Nina:

I can't thank you enough for posting these summaries. They are very
good reminders of what we listened to sometime ago but almost forgot
completely.

You were saying something about sore wrists last time we met in India,
I hope they can keep up with you kasula-cetana. Please take a good
care of yourself.

See you,
jaran
--- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Nina van Gorkom <nilo@e...> wrote:
> Cambodia, ch 13, no. 2.
>
	
9834

From: ellaruthau <cforsyth@v...> 
Date: Wed Dec 5, 2001 2:26am
Subject: Re: [dsg] some more about metta

 	
Dear Sarah,

Please don't be nervous at all, any teacher worth their salt would 
never mind honest criticism of something they have written......and 
your remarks are absolutely honest. I don't feel attached to 
anyones' words - if they're true, they're true - if they're not, 
they're not. I post, not to win a point (just as well :-)), but to 
see what people think, and to learn from their answers - if it fits 
what I am able to understand as truth at this moment.

metta,
Christine

--- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah <sarahdhhk@y...> wrote:
> Dear Christine,
> 
> Me again!
> 
> This post is a little harder for me to respond to as I'm always 
nervous about
> making any comments that may be seen as critical of any teacher or 
writing
> (unless someone writes directly to the list and then it's `fair 
game').
> 
> Actually, we'd be very pleased if your recent teacher were to join 
us here for
> further discussion. > metta,
> Sarah
	
9835

From: onco111 <dalthorp@o...> 
Date: Wed Dec 5, 2001 2:34am
Subject: unreal--[was: "The noble nine fold path"]

 	
Nyanaponika wrote a little about his translation in an essay 
entitled "The Worn-out Skin" [I believe it is a "Wheel" or "Bodhi 
Leaves" publication through BPS, a selection of which are compiled 
into a book called "Vision of Dhamma"]. I quote:

"The world is 'unreal' in the sense of presenting a deceptive 
appearance, being quite different in actuality from the way it 
appears to a greedy, lustful, hating, and ignorant mind. The Pali 
word 'vitatha', here rendered by 'unreal,' has both in Pali and 
Sanskrit the meaning of 'untrue' or 'false.' [The CSCD dictionary 
agrees precisely]. These verses, however, are not meant to convey the 
idea that the world is mere illusion, a play of the imagination. What 
underlies its deceptive appearance, the flux of mental and physical 
processes, is rea enough in the sense that it is effect-producing. 
The unreality lies in what we attribute to the world, and not in the 
world itself.

"What, now is this 'world' (loka) and this 'all' (sabba), which 
should be seen as unreal, in the sense of being deceptive? When the 
Enlightened One was questioned about these two words, he gave the 
same answer for both: 

1.'"One speaks of 'the world,' Lord. In how far is there are world or 
the designation 'world'?" "When there is the eye and visible forms, 
visual consciousness and things cognizable by visual consciousness; 
when there is the ear and sounds...; nose and smells...; tongue and 
flavours...; body and tangibles...; mind and ideas, mind-
consciousness and things cognizable by mind-consciousness--then there 
is a world and the designation 'world'."'[SN 35:68]

2. '"'All' will I show you, O monks. And what is 'all'? The eye and 
visible forms, ear and sounds, nose and smells, tongue and flavors, 
mind and ideas--this, O monks, is what is called 'all'."' [SN35:22]"
	
9836

From: onco111 <dalthorp@o...> 
Date: Wed Dec 5, 2001 2:36am
Subject: Re: Interesting sutta [Ken O]

 	
> Could you kindly provide the full text of the sutta as I don't have 
a copy
> or a link

Hi Ken,
I don't have a link either. The sutta is a few pages, and I will type 
it out for you when I have a little free time.

Dan
	
9837

From: ellaruthau <cforsyth@v...> 
Date: Wed Dec 5, 2001 3:01am
Subject: Is it only me?

 	
Dear all,

Is it only my "from" line that has changed to my user ID? Or is this 
a sophisticated way to teach me about Not-Self?
In addition, every time I try to enter dsg, I am told I am a guest 
and have to go through the whole routine of User ID and Password?

The only other theory I have concerns a malfunctioning toaster and a 
possum in my ceiling - but I think that's coincidence..... :-)

metta,
Christine
	
9838

From: onco111 <dalthorp@o...> 
Date: Wed Dec 5, 2001 3:13am
Subject: Re: Is it only me?

 	
It's not just you, Christine! Look at the recent messages 
from 'onco111' (Dan) and rjkpk (Robert K). I think Yahoo! did some 
rearranging. Last time they did this, I couldn't even post anymore 
and ended up having to sign up again. But it wouldn't let me even do 
that in a straightforward way--it kept telling me that my e-mail 
address wouldn't work. I finally found a way around it, but it took 
an hour or so. This time, they just messed around with the way the 
names are displayed. I'm thankful for that! 

Dan

> Dear all,
> 
> Is it only my "from" line that has changed to my user ID? Or is 
this 
> a sophisticated way to teach me about Not-Self?
> In addition, every time I try to enter dsg, I am told I am a guest 
> and have to go through the whole routine of User ID and Password?
> 
> The only other theory I have concerns a malfunctioning toaster and 
a 
> possum in my ceiling - but I think that's coincidence..... :-)
> 
> metta,
> Christine
	
9839

From: ellaruthau <cforsyth@v...> 
Date: Wed Dec 5, 2001 3:32am
Subject: Re: Is it only me?

 	
Thanks Dan - I don't think I'll bother trying to change it back - I'd 
probably cause more problems - the only other change is that a 
warning now appears at the top of the Post page saying your email 
address will be displayed in the message you send. Wasn't it always?

metta,
Christine

--- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "onco111" <dalthorp@o...> wrote:
> It's not just you, Christine! Look at the recent messages 
> from 'onco111' (Dan) and rjkpk (Robert K). I think Yahoo! did some 
> rearranging. Last time they did this, I couldn't even post anymore 
> and ended up having to sign up again. But it wouldn't let me even 
do 
> that in a straightforward way--it kept telling me that my e-mail 
> address wouldn't work. I finally found a way around it, but it took 
> an hour or so. This time, they just messed around with the way the 
> names are displayed. I'm thankful for that! 
> 
> Dan
> 
> > Dear all,
> > 
> > Is it only my "from" line that has changed to my user ID? Or is 
> this 
> > a sophisticated way to teach me about Not-Self?
> > In addition, every time I try to enter dsg, I am told I am a 
guest 
> > and have to go through the whole routine of User ID and Password?
> > 
> > The only other theory I have concerns a malfunctioning toaster 
and 
> a 
> > possum in my ceiling - but I think that's coincidence..... :-)
> > 
> > metta,
> > Christine
	
9840

From: Sarah <sarahdhhk@y...> 
Date: Wed Dec 5, 2001 3:33am
Subject: Re: [dsg] unreal--[was: "The noble nine fold path"]

 	
Dear Friends,

Just in brief, I wish to apologise.

I've just realised I haven't been comparing 'like with like'.

The Uraga Sutta stanzas that Herman quoted, I now see, were from the middle of
the sutta and not from the start, as I'd thought.

Thanks to Dan's extra note, I now can quote the Pali, Thanissaro, Nyanaponika
and Saddhatissa for the same verse 9:

1. Pali
Yo naaccasaari na paccasaari
'sabba.m vitatham idan'ti ~natvaa loke
so bhikkhu jahaati orapaara.m
urago ji.n.nam taca.m puraa.na.m

2. Thanissaro
He who neither goes too far nor lags behind
and knows about the world: "This is all unreal,"
-- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond,
just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. 

3. Nyanaponika
Who neither goes too far nor lags behind
and knows about the world: 'This is all unreal,'
-such monk gives up the Here and the Beyond,
just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin.

4. Saddhatissa
He who is neither restless nor indolent and knowing that all is unsubstantial,
that monk gives up the Cycle of Existence as the snake sheds its old, decayed
skin.

I apologise again for any confusion and Herman, I apologise for more Pali;-)

Sarah

p.s Talking about worn-out skins, I just pulled out a 25yr old,
falling-to-pieces copy of the Wheel "Worn-out Skin' with a note in the front to
show it was given to me by 'Dhamma Friends in Sri Lanka'. I'll read all the
notes tomorrow.




--- onco111 <dalthorp@o...> wrote: > Nyanaponika wrote a little
about his translation in an essay 
> entitled "The Worn-out Skin" [I believe it is a "Wheel" or "Bodhi 
> Leaves" publication through BPS, a selection of which are compiled 
> into a book called "Vision of Dhamma"]. I quote:
> 
> "The world is 'unreal' in the sense of presenting a deceptive 
> appearance, being quite different in actuality from the way it 
> appears to a greedy, lustful, hating, and ignorant mind. The Pali 
> word 'vitatha', here rendered by 'unreal,' has both in Pali and 
> Sanskrit the meaning of 'untrue' or 'false.' [The CSCD dictionary 
> agrees precisely]. These verses, however, are not meant to convey the 
> idea that the world is mere illusion, a play of the imagination. What 
> underlies its deceptive appearance, the flux of mental and physical 
> processes, is rea enough in the sense that it is effect-producing. 
> The unreality lies in what we attribute to the world, and not in the 
> world itself.
> 
> "What, now is this 'world' (loka) and this 'all' (sabba), which 
> should be seen as unreal, in the sense of being deceptive? When the 
> Enlightened One was questioned about these two words, he gave the 
> same answer for both: 
> 
> 1.'"One speaks of 'the world,' Lord. In how far is there are world or 
> the designation 'world'?" "When there is the eye and visible forms, 
> visual consciousness and things cognizable by visual consciousness; 
> when there is the ear and sounds...; nose and smells...; tongue and 
> flavours...; body and tangibles...; mind and ideas, mind-
> consciousness and things cognizable by mind-consciousness--then there 
> is a world and the designation 'world'."'[SN 35:68]
> 
> 2. '"'All' will I show you, O monks. And what is 'all'? The eye and 
> visible forms, ear and sounds, nose and smells, tongue and flavors, 
> mind and ideas--this, O monks, is what is called 'all'."' [SN35:22]"
>

	
9841

From: onco111 <dalthorp@o...> 
Date: Wed Dec 5, 2001 3:41am
Subject: Re: Is it only me?

 	
> Thanks Dan - I don't think I'll bother trying to change it back - 

Smart move. I just spent 20 precious minutes trying to edit my 
profile and whatnot trying to fix the problem. All to no avail. Oh 
well.
	
9842

From: Sarah <sarahdhhk@y...> 
Date: Wed Dec 5, 2001 3:49am
Subject: Re: [dsg] unreal--[was: "The noble nine fold path"]

 	
Oooops!

Another wrong assumption;-(

I just checked Thanissaro's translation and it is the following:

The monk who hasn't slipped past or turned back,
knowing with regard to the world
that "All this is unreal,"
    sloughs off the near shore & far -- 
    as a snake, its decrepit old skin. 

Herman had quoted Nyanaponika's.

Herman, i'm sorry if we've also somewhat lost the gist of your original message
i.e that wrong views and attachments need to be discarded....

S.


--- Sarah <sarahdhhk@y...> wrote: > Dear Friends,
> 
> Just in brief, I wish to apologise.
> 
> I've just realised I haven't been comparing 'like with like'.
> 
> The Uraga Sutta stanzas that Herman quoted, I now see, were from the middle
> of
> the sutta and not from the start, as I'd thought.
> 
> Thanks to Dan's extra note, I now can quote the Pali, Thanissaro, Nyanaponika
> and Saddhatissa for the same verse 9:
> 
> 1. Pali
> Yo naaccasaari na paccasaari
> 'sabba.m vitatham idan'ti ~natvaa loke
> so bhikkhu jahaati orapaara.m
> urago ji.n.nam taca.m puraa.na.m


> 3. Nyanaponika
> Who neither goes too far nor lags behind
> and knows about the world: 'This is all unreal,'
> -such monk gives up the Here and the Beyond,
> just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin.
> 
> 4. Saddhatissa
> He who is neither restless nor indolent and knowing that all is
> unsubstantial,
> that monk gives up the Cycle of Existence as the snake sheds its old, decayed
> skin.


	
9843

From: Sarah <sarahdhhk@y...> 
Date: Wed Dec 5, 2001 4:06am
Subject: Re: [dsg] unreal--[was: "The noble nine fold path"]

 	
p.s -Dan,

these notes you added are very helpful and make it very clear, I think. I like
the cross-references to the other suttas too. 

many thanks.
S 

Hope you all get used to your new 'skins' or 'names';-)

> --- onco111 <dalthorp@o...> wrote: > Nyanaponika wrote a little
> about his translation in an essay 
> > entitled "The Worn-out Skin" [I believe it is a "Wheel" or "Bodhi 
> > Leaves" publication through BPS, a selection of which are compiled 
> > into a book called "Vision of Dhamma"]. I quote:
> > 
> > "The world is 'unreal' in the sense of presenting a deceptive 
> > appearance, being quite different in actuality from the way it 
> > appears to a greedy, lustful, hating, and ignorant mind. The Pali 
> > word 'vitatha', here rendered by 'unreal,' has both in Pali and 
> > Sanskrit the meaning of 'untrue' or 'false.' [The CSCD dictionary 
> > agrees precisely]. These verses, however, are not meant to convey the 
> > idea that the world is mere illusion, a play of the imagination. What 
> > underlies its deceptive appearance, the flux of mental and physical 
> > processes, is rea enough in the sense that it is effect-producing. 
> > The unreality lies in what we attribute to the world, and not in the 
> > world itself.
> > 
> > "What, now is this 'world' (loka) and this 'all' (sabba), which 
> > should be seen as unreal, in the sense of being deceptive? When the 
> > Enlightened One was questioned about these two words, he gave the 
> > same answer for both: 
> > 
> > 1.'"One speaks of 'the world,' Lord. In how far is there are world or 
> > the designation 'world'?" "When there is the eye and visible forms, 
> > visual consciousness and things cognizable by visual consciousness; 
> > when there is the ear and sounds...; nose and smells...; tongue and 
> > flavours...; body and tangibles...; mind and ideas, mind-
> > consciousness and things cognizable by mind-consciousness--then there 
> > is a world and the designation 'world'."'[SN 35:68]
> > 
> > 2. '"'All' will I show you, O monks. And what is 'all'? The eye and 
> > visible forms, ear and sounds, nose and smells, tongue and flavors, 
> > mind and ideas--this, O monks, is what is called 'all'."' [SN35:22]"
> >


9844

From: rikpa21 <rikpa21@y...> 
Date: Wed Dec 5, 2001 6:03am
Subject: Re: The noble nine fold path

 	
--- In dhammastudygroup@y..., hhofman@d... wrote:

> Right view in my understanding is not a view that is held. It is 
> seeing what is there when clinging (ie clinging to held views) 
> ceases.

I wonder speculations those those blind men would cling to about the 
nature of an elephant were their eyes suddenly opened. I wonder how 
many would continue to entertain beliefs like "it is like a fan" 
or "it is like a whisk-broom", etc.

> I don't think dispensing with right view is possible.
> 
> What is the problem with the rendition: All this is unreal?

I see no problem with it. There's the letting go of clinging route; 
the "cutting through appearances" route. So many, many ways to slice 
the Dhamma. Re: the term "ditthi", I think Mike mentioned it 
referring to "miccha ditthi" but teachers I respect have taught me 
that any view at all is considered ditthi, to be discarded. Right 
View is the equivalent of no-view, it is beyond taking any position 
at all, as the sutta Herman quoted notes. What need is there for 
ditthi (speculation) of any kind when there is direct knowledge?
	

 	 

	
9845

From: <upasaka@a...> 
Date: Wed Dec 5, 2001 2:01am
Subject: Re: [dsg] The noble nine fold path

 	
Hi, Robert -

In a message dated 12/5/01 1:05:54 AM Eastern Standard Time, rjkjp@y... 
writes:


> Dear Howard,
> I'm flattered that you think any translation i make would be 
> acceptable. Unfortunately my pali is very weak and I would be just 
> relying on the Pali-English dictionary and my own intuition; not 
> reliable I'm afraid.
> If Herman gives us the url's we can all look at these translations, 
> though.
> Even if the best translation does turn out to be 'unreal' I think 
> this shouldn't be seized on without regard to the rest of the 
> Tipitaka. Sometimes rupa and the khandas are described as void 
> (sunna) false(tuccha),asara(essenceless) or compared with foam or a 
> mirage etc.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Howard:
I agree. Such terms should be understood in the middle-way/emptiness 
sense only, and not in a nihilistic sense. I think they are very important, 
that they reflect the way things really are, and they help protect us against 
substantialist and eternalist views. But such terminology also constitutes 
dangerous medicine, which perhaps is why it isn't given so often, or in very 
large measure, by the Buddha.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
These descriptions assist us in contemplating the khandas > 
> so as to turn away from them, it does not mean that the khandas are 
> imaginary.
> 

> robert k.
> ===========================
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) 




	
9846

From: Robert Eddison <robedd@i...> 
Date: Wed Dec 5, 2001 7:50am
Subject: Re: Welcome

 	
Wed, 26 Sep 2001 17:41:07 +0800 (CST)

Sarah wrote:

>Thank you very much indeed for your extremely helpful comments below, which I
>look forward to reading more carefully later. I'm sure I speak for everyone
>when I say that I'm really delighted that you've joined us here and really look
>forward to more of your very 'enlightened' contributions;-)
>
>I hope you're fully recovered now and when you've 'caught up' , I think we'd
>all be very interested to hear anything you wish to share about how your
>serious interest in the Tipitaka and Pali developed


Dear Sarah,

Thanks for the welcome. Now two months later I get around to replying! As I
mentioned in my e-mail to you, the visual impairment from my recent illness
prevents me from contributing except when I have someone to type for me. As
I live a reclusive life this is less often than I might wish.

By way of introduction: I am an Englishman but have lived in Iceland since
1994. I first encountered the Buddha's teaching when I was 14 in an
anthology of texts from different Buddhist traditions. Later I began
attending the zazen sessions of a Soto Zen group in my home town
(Nottingham). At weekends I would travel to Birmingham to study and
meditate under the guidance of the Burmese monk Dr. Rewata Dhamma.

Later I moved to Thailand for 9 years. I studied Pali with Sayadaw
Dhammananda at Wat Tha Ma O in Lampang, and then in Bangkok at Wat
Mahadhatu and Wat Benchamabophitr. My study has focussed mainly on the
Suttas. I have not gone into Abhidhamma or the Atthakathaa in a very
systematic fashion, but have often used them for reference to clarify
psychological terms and any doubtful matters.

I am currently working on an English translation of the canonical Jaataka
(i.e. only the verses, not the stories).

>(or anything else mundane such as where you live and so on).

Okay, the mundane stuff: I work as a freelance Icelandic-English
translator, mostly doing legal texts for the Icelandic parliament and the
occasional novel or film script. I am divorced and now live as an urban
recluse in downtown Reykjavik (or rather, semi-recluse since I do have a
couple of cats, Antisthenes and Monimus).

My other interests include the philosophy of law, Stoicism, Elizabethan
poetry, climbing glaciers, and (in non-reclusive moments) 'glima' --
Iceland's home-grown martial art -- an easily learned and rather primitive
style of wrestling that dates back to the 9th century.

Well, that's all for now.

With best wishes,

Robert
	
9847

From: Robert Eddison <robedd@i...> 
Date: Wed Dec 5, 2001 7:47am
Subject: Re: Doctrinal Conflicts/ Re. more Abhidhamma...

 	
oreznoone@a...

>The term 'paramattha' does not occur in the suttas. (I hope to pursue some 
>questions about this here someday.)

I am puzzled as to just what you mean by this, since the term 'paramattha'
most definitely does occur in the Suttas, though not in the sense in which
it is used in the Commentaries.

Are you perhaps referring to paramattha sacca (truth in the highest sense)?
If so, I would agree that this term is absent in the Suttas, though I would
suggest that the notion is present. That is to say, the idea that something
may be true conventionally but not ultimately is inferrable from the
Suttas, even though it is expressed in different terms.

What the Commentaries call conventional truth (sammuti-sacca), the Suttas
call 'worldly consensus' (lokasamañña), 'worldly language' (lokanirutti),
'worldly usage' (lokavohaara), or 'worldly convention' (lokapaññatti).

What the Commentaries call truth in the highest sense (paramattha-sacca) is
indicated in several ways in the Suttas, but most unambiguously when the
Buddha prefaces a statement with "In truth and reality..." (saccato thetato).

E.g.

"....since in truth and reality there obtains neither self nor what belongs
to self...."
(Alagadduupama Sutta )

"In truth and reality, here and now the Tathaagata is not to be found [i.e.
in the khandhas, apart from the khandhas etc.]."
(Yamaka Sutta)

Best wishes,

Robert
	
9848

From: Nina van Gorkom <nilo@e...> 
Date: Wed Dec 5, 2001 10:07am
Subject: Cambodia Ch 13, no. 3

 	
Cambodia ch 13, no 3.

People who listened at the time when the Sammåsambuddha had not yet finally
passed away, could understand immediately the characteristics of nåma and
rúpa. The reason was that they had developed understanding, that they had
listened and considered what they had learnt to a great extent. When we read
the life stories of those people we see that, before they could realize the
four noble truths at the moment of enlightenment, they had to study and
listen a great deal during many lives, so that they could become
³bahussuta². A person who is bahussuta (bahu is much, and suta is heard) is
someone who has listened and studied a great deal in order to understand
realities. As Khun Nipat has said, at that time there were no books.
Therefore, people listened with understanding and they did not think of
textbooks or different subjects written down in books. They heard about
realities that were appearing, they could investigate and understand them
immediately. Their study was based on listening and considering, they knew
that what they heard concerned the reality appearing at that very moment.
When the Buddha asked whether seeing was permanent or impermanent, they
answered, ³impermanent². They did not memorize this from a textbook, but
seeing was performing the function of seeing, and the paññå they had
developed was the condition for understanding the truth of the reality at
that moment. 

The word seeing that is translated differently in different languages, is in
Pali cakkhu-viññåna. Is seeing at this very moment permanent or impermanent?
People at the Buddha¹s time could answer that it was impermanent. It depends
on the level of paññå how someone can answer this question. People who had
developed paññå that could penetrate the truth could give the right answer.
Just a moment ago I asked Khun Jaran whether he knew hardness on the level
of the theory, pariyatti, or on the level of patipatti, the practice. One
should be sincere, truthful, when one considers this. When it is still
pariyatti, one takes hardness for the hardness of a table or a chair. When a
person has studied the Dhamma he knows that it is a kind of element that can
be experienced through the bodysense, a reality that is hardness. People at
the Buddha¹s time who answered the Buddha¹s question about realities being
permanent or impermanent could, when his discourse was finished, become a
sotåpanna or even an arahat. We may give the same answer as those people but
has pañña reached the same level as their paññå? It depends on conditions
what level paññå has reached. When satipatthåna arises one can begin to
understand the difference between sati of the level of dåna or síla and of
the level of satipatthåna. Sati of satipttìhåna has a characteristic that
arises and appears. Not a self, but sati is aware of the characteritistics
of realities. It is aware of the realities that naturally appear in daily
life. Paññå that arises and is conditioned by satipatthåna is the reality
that clearly understands those realities as they are. Paññå is different
from sati.

****




	
9849

From: Nina van Gorkom <nilo@e...> 
Date: Wed Dec 5, 2001 10:07am
Subject: Re: [dsg] Book by Law

 	
op 04-12-2001 07:33 schreef Sarah op sarahdhhk@y...:


> In another book I have by G.P. Malalsekera ‘The Pali Literature of Ceylon’, he
> refers to Law’s ‘The Life and Work of Buddhaghosa’ (maybe, the book you have,
> Nina?) in which he says the later ‘has a very interesting chapter on the
> origin
> of these commentaries.

Dear Sarah, yes, that is the book. At the time Buddhaghosa was in Sri Lanka
there were five very old commentaries of which he mentioned three in his Co
to the Vinaya. See also intro to "Survey". The names are known but they do
not exist anymore. Law also quotes from the Mahavamsa. What you quote is
also very interesting.
The Life and Work of Buddhaghosa, by B.C. Law. Pilgrims Books, ISBN
81-7624-054-0
and also distributed in Nepal: info@p... and also Web site:
<http://gfas.com/pilgrims >

Nina.
	
9850

From: Robert Epstein <epsteinrob@Y...> 
Date: Wed Dec 5, 2001 11:28am
Subject: Re: [dsg] Is it only me?

 	
--- ellaruthau <cforsyth@v...> wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> Is it only my "from" line that has changed to my user ID? Or is this 
> a sophisticated way to teach me about Not-Self?
> In addition, every time I try to enter dsg, I am told I am a guest 
> and have to go through the whole routine of User ID and Password?
> 
> The only other theory I have concerns a malfunctioning toaster and a 
> possum in my ceiling - but I think that's coincidence..... :-)
> 
> metta,
> Christine

It's definitely the possum!

Robert ep.



	
9851

From: ellaruthau <cforsyth@v...> 
Date: Wed Dec 5, 2001 0:25pm
Subject: Re: [dsg] Is it only me?

 	
Dear Robert,

:-))) With 'possum paranoia' at its height in this household, it's 
not wise to encourage me..... There is nothing to compare with the 
sound of 'thundering possum feet' at 2.00 am jumping onto my metal 
roof (out of a tree), finding access into the ceiling, and conducting 
possum races all night....at least, I think that's what they are 
doing..... My pitiful pounding on the ceiling with a broom handle, 
only results in unfair criticism from my son who incorrectly feels I 
am more trouble than the possum.

metta,
Christine
--- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein <epsteinrob@Y...> wrote:
> 

> > The only other theory I have concerns a malfunctioning toaster 
and a 
> > possum in my ceiling - but I think that's coincidence..... :-)
> > 
> > metta,
> > Christine
> 
> It's definitely the possum!
> 
> Robert ep.
> 
> 
> 
	
9852

From: m. nease <mlnease@y...> 
Date: Wed Dec 5, 2001 3:33pm
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Doctrinal Conflicts/ Re. more Abhidhamma...

 	
Robert,

So very glad to hear from you again. I hope your
recovery is proceeding apace and that you will be able
to continue to correspond--your posts are among the
very best.

mike
--- Robert Eddison <robedd@i...> wrote:
> oreznoone@a...
> 
> >The term 'paramattha' does not occur in the suttas.
> (I hope to pursue some 
> >questions about this here someday.)
> 
> I am puzzled as to just what you mean by this, since
> the term 'paramattha'
> most definitely does occur in the Suttas, though not
> in the sense in which
> it is used in the Commentaries.
> 
> Are you perhaps referring to paramattha sacca (truth
> in the highest sense)?
> If so, I would agree that this term is absent in the
> Suttas, though I would
> suggest that the notion is present. That is to say,
> the idea that something
> may be true conventionally but not ultimately is
> inferrable from the
> Suttas, even though it is expressed in different
> terms.
> 
> What the Commentaries call conventional truth
> (sammuti-sacca), the Suttas
> call 'worldly consensus' (lokasamañña), 'worldly
> language' (lokanirutti),
> 'worldly usage' (lokavohaara), or 'worldly
> convention' (lokapaññatti).
> 
> What the Commentaries call truth in the highest
> sense (paramattha-sacca) is
> indicated in several ways in the Suttas, but most
> unambiguously when the
> Buddha prefaces a statement with "In truth and
> reality..." (saccato thetato).
> 
> E.g.
> 
> "....since in truth and reality there obtains
> neither self nor what belongs
> to self...."
> (Alagadduupama Sutta )
> 
> "In truth and reality, here and now the Tathaagata
> is not to be found [i.e.
> in the khandhas, apart from the khandhas etc.]."
> (Yamaka Sutta)
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Robert

	
9853

From: Robert Eddison <robedd@i...> 
Date: Wed Dec 5, 2001 2:09pm
Subject: Re: Doctrinal Conflicts/ Re. more Abhidhamma...

 	
I must apologise... the message I posted about paramattha sacca ought to
have been sent to the dhamma list, not the dhamma study group. Thank you to
Christine for notifying me of the error.

Robert

I wrote:

>>The term 'paramattha' does not occur in the suttas. (I hope to 
>pursue some 
>>questions about this here someday.)
>
>I am puzzled as to just what you mean by this, since the 

etc. etc.
	
9854

From: egberdina <hhofman@d...> 
Date: Wed Dec 5, 2001 6:45pm
Subject: Re: [dsg] The noble nine fold path

 	
Dear Sarah, Dan, Howard, Robert K

I am glad that things have sorted themselves out. Thanks for the 
translators notes, Dan. 

I apologise for not having clearly referenced the texts I quoted. It 
makes a big difference when we are all talking about the same thing. 
Sorry about that.

Sarah, the noble ninefold fold path is the noble eight fold path 
preceded with what appeared to be a prerequisite "right translation". 
small attempt at wit. Sorry :-)

Metta

Herman


--- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah <sarahdhhk@y...> wrote:
> Dear Herman,
> 
> This time perhaps it's me being dense, but I can't quite see where 
your subject
> heading `The No