12600 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Apr 11, 2002 11:21pm Subject: RE: [dsg] ADL ch. 3 (16-18) Dear Larry, Have you ever smelled a pungent odor that you immediately dislike? It is the dosa that replled the object: it has that smell as its aramana. All the conascent states, including the citta along with other cetasikas, also has the smell as the aramana. Domanassa vedena co-arises with dosa-mula citta, the feeling associated with the citta, having the smell as its object, is unpleasant. If you read further on (in ADL), you will see that the cittas arising on the panca-dvara (5 sense door) all have the same object as aramana. Although dosa-mula citta doesn't smell (as that is the function of kana-vinnana citta), it has the smell as its aramana. When dosa-mula citta arises in the panca-dvara vithi, the object of the citta is still present (has not fallen away). When dosa-mula citta arises in the mano-dvara vithi, virtually immediately after the panca-dvara vithi, the dosa-mula cittas have the same rupa (but the rupa has already fallen away) as the aramana. Although logically, the dosa-mula citta is cognizing the memory of the visesa lakkana of the fallen away rupa, I don't think the text exactly says this. How this exactly works is probably very intricate, and may not be very important (because this happens so fast we won't be able to tell the difference anyway). kom > -----Original Message----- > From: LBIDD@w... [mailto:LBIDD@w...] > Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 8:46 PM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [dsg] ADL ch. 3 (16-18) > > > Dear Kom, thanks for your detailed reply. Could > you answer one more > question. How does dosa mula citta experience > rupa, for example? It > isn't a 5 sense consciousness and one citta can't > experience another > citta. Is it the memory or mark that sanna makes > when 5 sense > conscousness experiences rupa that is the object > of dosa mula citta? > > 12601 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Apr 11, 2002 11:31pm Subject: RE: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (18-20)- Kom Dear Sarah, > -----Original Message----- > From: Sarah [mailto:sarahdhhk@y...] > > Did the text expand what being known > inferentially means? > > As I understand, one "easy" way to explain > paramatha dhamma > > is that it is a reality that can be directly > known without > > thinking. However, being inferntial (in the > conventional > > sense) brings us closer to thinking. I wonder > if the text > > would describe other forms of rupas (besides > the 7) as can > > be known inferentially. > > > Kom, I’ve had another look at BB’s translation > and also the other one by > Narada on line. > > This sentence you refer to may be a little > misleading. I think it is > merely stressing that apodhatu (water element) > cannot be experienced > through the bodysense. Thanks for looking this up. I definitely didn't mean that the water element cannot be known directly; I am just puzzled by the choice of word "inferential" and was wondering if there is further explanation about what being inferential means. On the other hand, this thought occurs to me. I am obssessed to learn about what "inferential" and what "knowing directly through the mind, but not the sense" is really like. However, the visible object is also known through the mind door right now. If there is panna knowing the difference between knowing through the sense door, and knowing through the mind door (for visible object, and maybe other realities), then knowing other realities at the mind door is probably close enough to answer that question. Thanks for the chance for further reflection. kom 12602 From: Sarah Date: Thu Apr 11, 2002 11:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sri Lanka corner2 Dear Christine, You really give us all some good laughs.....I still smile when I think about your post-analysis of the spider and lizard conditioned cittas;-))) As an active ‘insect-rescuer’ myself, , I was reflecting on a few hometruths too;-) After you politely challenged my memories of snake noises (which were after all nearly 30yrs ago!!!) and cautioning us whilst camping near dairy cattle, I should have known better than to think I could skip the hunting details from the Mahavamsa. So let me answer a couple of your questions here: ..... --- christine_forsyth wrote: >...... Hunting with forty thousand men? No > doubt they weren't all on foot either...... One would wonder if > whatever it was they were hunting had no sense of smell and was deaf > and blind as well.....and even then, as long as it was alive, it > would have been able to feel the pounding vibrations of all those > moving men and animals on the earth.... ..... Let me quote a little here from Ch X1V “The king Devanampiyatissa who had arranged a water festival for the dwellers in the capital, set forth to enjoy the pleasures of the chase. Attended by forty thousand of his men he went on FOOT to the Missaka mountain.The deva of the mountain who desired to show the theras to him, appeared there in the form of an elk-stag browsing in the thicket. When the king saw him, he thought: “It is unseemly to kill an unheeding (creature)’ and he struck out a sound from his bowstring; the stag fled towards the mountain The king pursued, but the stag in his flight drew near to the thera. when the thera came into the prince’s view the (deva) himself vanished.” ********** It rather reminds me of the recent debates in England over what is ‘seemly’ hunting;-) ..... You wrote at the end: > Thank you for reminding and clarifying from an abhidhamma point of > view just what is happening with tears and other reactions. .......... We don’t have to analyse and ‘try to work it out’, but we can be sure there are many moments of attachment and aversion mixed in with the appreciation and so on, I find. I understood the comments in your own post about “recognising the familiar path to home and safety after a dangerous journey” and ‘spiritual despair’. I’m sure many of us will sympathise with these sentiments. Thankyou , Azita and others for your honest and open-hearted sharing here. metta, Sarah ========= 12603 From: newthings_65 Date: Fri Apr 12, 2002 0:02am Subject: dhamma courses Hi there all, I was wondering whether anyone knew of a correspondence course in Dhamma/Buddhist Studies? Are there any on-line courses? Help!!! Metta Jo 12604 From: Sarah Date: Fri Apr 12, 2002 0:17am Subject: RE: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (18-20)- Kom Dear Kom, > Thanks for looking this up. I definitely didn't mean that > the water element cannot be known directly; I am just > puzzled by the choice of word "inferential" and was > wondering if there is further explanation about what being > inferential means. ..... No more detail (or pali) on this.It’s in the Guide to #3, ch V1. I take it to mean that in terms of being physically experienced, it can only be known by inference from the experience of the other 7 rupas directly experienced through bodysense. Rather confusing, I agree. ..... > On the other hand, this thought occurs to me. I am > obssessed to learn about what "inferential" and what > "knowing directly through the mind, but not the sense" is > really like. ..... Like the subtle rupas and pasada rupas which can only be experienced and known through the mind-door, I think. It may seem that cakkhu pasada (eye-sense, as I was discussing w/Herman) or other rupas in these categories can only ever be thought about, but we don’t know what may be possible. Not easy at all, however and much depends on accumulations and growth of wisdom. ..... >However, the visible object is also known > through the mind door right now. If there is panna knowing > the difference between knowing through the sense door, and > knowing through the mind door (for visible object, and maybe > other realities), then knowing other realities at the mind > door is probably close enough to answer that question. ..... As I understand, visible object is being experienced through eye-door and immediately following mind-door processes sometimes. Awareness can arise in either process, but it’s not necessary ( or possible?) to know which and there’s no use in trying to find out. When there is awareness, it is just aware of its object and not concerned about door-ways. Now, most the time, the doorways are covered up because there is no awareness. When awareness develops they become clearer, not by thinking but by understanding the realities appearing more precisely. It’s clear that apodhatu cannot be experienced by body-sense and so on. I’m pretty sure we’re saying the same thing, so just ignore any repetitions. Always good chatting, Kom Sarah ===== 12605 From: Sarah Date: Fri Apr 12, 2002 0:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] dhamma courses Dear Jo, Welcome to dsg! --- newthings_65 wrote: > Hi there all, > > I was wondering whether anyone knew of a correspondence course in > Dhamma/Buddhist Studies? > > Are there any on-line courses? > > Help!!! Maybe you could add a little about your particular interest and I know others will provide links to more formal courses. Meanwhile, if you've just arrived, some of us are studying an introductory abhidhamma text together here as you'll see in the ADL headings. You're most welcome to join in and ask any questions, however basic. You'll find the first sections used for studies posted at this link under 'Beginner's Abhidhamma Corner' or something like that: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/ We'd also be glad to hear anything else about you and your interest in Buddhism. (feel free to skip the technical posts for now;-)) Best wishes, Sarah ========== 12606 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Apr 12, 2002 1:40am Subject: Re: dhamma courses Hi Jo, A couple of different courses from a Theravadin perspective may suit you. metta, Christine Buddhism for Beginners Course http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/bbcourse.htm Lecturers: mainly Theravadin Monks from the UK and USA and some lay persons Weekly Lectures by Emails or Internet New students can join anytime now ----------------------------------------------------------- MEDITATION COURSE ----------------------------------------------------------- http://www.vipassana.com/course/ Our online Meditation Course was established in 1997 and has been experienced by well over a thousand participants (many of whom have taken the course several times). It is ideally suited to those who wish to learn to meditate but are without access to a local meditation teacher or group. The course presents a balanced approach to Buddhist Meditation practice as found in the Theravada tradition. This 'doctrine of the elders' is rooted in the Buddha's teachings as recorded in the earliest Buddhist texts, and is the form of Buddhism nowadays most often found in Thailand, Sri Lanka and Myanmar. Our 90 day course includes guidance on the traditional practices of Mindfulness of Breathing (anpanasati), the Sublime Abodes (loving- kindness, compassion, appreciative joy and equanimity) and Vipassana (insight) meditation. We look at the difficulties that are often encountered by meditators and at effective strategies for overcoming them. Careful attention is also given to the ethical framework that is necessary for spiritual development to occur. The courses are intensely practical and the emphasis is on enabling participants to develop a fulfilling and sustainable approach to meditation that remains consistent with the Buddha's teachings. ----------------------------------------------------------- FORTHCOMING COURSES ----------------------------------------------------------- The dates for the next two sessions of the Meditation Course have now been confirmed. Both of these courses will be supported by Andrew Quernmore, and each lasts 90 days. Course 1 begins in the week of MAY 12th, 2002 Course 2 begins in the week of DECEMBER 15th, 2002 Registration for both courses is now available on the vipassana.com web site. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "newthings_65" wrote: > Hi there all, > > I was wondering whether anyone knew of a correspondence course in > Dhamma/Buddhist Studies? > > Are there any on-line courses? > > Help!!! > > Metta > > Jo 12607 From: abhidhammika Date: Fri Apr 12, 2002 4:10am Subject: All That The Buddha Taught Was Abhidhamma Dear Dhamma Friends The following is a slightly edited version of the post I recently wrote to Joyce Short. Hope it stimulates your intellect and facilitates some brain-storming. With best wishes, Suan Lu Zaw --------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- Dear Joyce How are you? You wrote: "I turn up my nose at Abhidhamma, but when I read the clarity of Suan's posts, her (sic) calm, logical, non critical, even handed methods and ways of going about problem solving, this quite takes my breath away in delight and I could easily be seduced in to Abhidhamma study out of admiration for somene who walks the talk-that perhaps I then could be like her (sic). I might even be willing to be taught, a rare thing for me." (her (sic) = his, him. (Joyce thought Suan was a woman.)) Suan replied as follows. Thank you for your kind compliments on my posts. The following is my personal insights into the differentiation between Suttas and Abhidhamma. Believe it or not, the Buddha taught only abhidhamma. In plain English, abhidhamma is the subject of what we can observe, experience, remove, eradicate, cultivate, develop and achieve - in short, the subject of what we can do with our minds or our lives. And as every discourse in the Sutta Pitaka also deals with what we can do with our minds or our lives, every discourse teaches segments of abhidhamma. Now, why then is there the differentiation between Sutta Pitaka and Abhidhamma Pitaka? The differentiation is not what they teach, but how they teach. When abhidhamma is spoon-fed to a particular listener, it is called a Sutta. In fact, that particular sutta can even be named after that listener. For example, Joyce Short Suttam. The Joyce Short Suttam would be a segment of abhidhamma tailored to Joyce Short. When a Sutta is explained by drawing out all the possible implications with or without their systemisation and reconstruction, it becomes Abhidhamma. There you have it. Every time you read a Suttam, you are reading a segment or segments of Abhidhamma. And when you come to the stage of feeling the need to know further implications and their links related to the partial teachings in that Suttam, then you are ready for listening to Abhidhamma Pitaka. You also wrote: "Unfortunately, this is not likely as I haven't the capacity" Well, I doubt that you did not have the capacity to learn things important to you, their implications and links fully and systematically. You also wrote: "Its not what we study or practice but how what we do transforms us. To me anyway." It is good to know that transformation is important to you. Transformation of the mind for the highest possible way is all that the Buddha taught, and that is why his teachings are called Abhidhamma. Abhi = extraordinary, extreme, done at the highest level, done in the highest way. Dhamma = teachings. With kind regards, Suan The bearded Aussie Man http://www.bodhiology.org 12608 From: Sarah Date: Fri Apr 12, 2002 6:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] corrected part of part 2 Co to Sivaka sutta and part 3. Dear Nina, Thankyou for your efforts to translate the commentary to the Sivaka Sutta. I wrote before about the references to bile (pitta) in the text (see end of post )and how I believe this needs to be understood from the Ayurveda point of view to be understood. Disorders or disturbances of the pitta type can thus be easily observed. I’ve just come across B.Bodhi’s translation of the sutta and notice he refers to bile disorders, phlegm disorders and wind disorders.and adds a note at the back to say (p1435) “that bile (pitta), phlegm (semha), and wind (vaata) are the three bodily humours (dosa) of Indian Ayurveda medicine.” .......... I’ve found these websites which you may like to have a quick glance at for an idea of the history of ayurveda/more details about pitta and other constitutions: http://www.spiritweb.org/Spirit/ayurveda.html http://www.ayurveda-herbs.com/Ayurveda-Alternative-Herbs.htm I hope this helps a little. It is not the same as ‘bile’ in a western sense. Sarah =============== This is a note from one of my links above: “The concept of constitution (prakriti) is central to Ayurveda. Individuals are comprised of the 3 forces (Vata, Pitta, Kapha) in unique combinations so that no 2 persons are alike. The constitutional determination provides insight into the deeper workings of an individual. With this it is possible to become aware of the foods, spices, herbal medicines, emotions, thoughts, climates, colours, activities and so on that tend to either balance or unbalance a particular individual and to either improve or aggravate various types of illness.” QUOTE FROM MY EARLIER POST “According to Ayurveda, vata, pitta and kapha are names for these three principles of movement and heat , which combine to determine each person's mind/body type or constitution. I’m just quoting from a book before I get mixed up: “Vata controls all movement in the body such as respiration, circulation, elimination and the flow of nerve impulses to and from the brain. Pitta governs digestion and assimilation of food and liquids throughout the body. Kapha governs protection through the mucus membranes and stability through bone structure.” Anyway, I started on this diversion when I read the Pali below (pittasamu.t.thaanaanipi) for ‘produced by (disorders of the) bile’ and immediately thought of the ayurvedice ‘pitta’ types and disorders. Usually they are firy and easily irritable. ..... ``pittasamu.t.thaanaanipi kho, siivaka, idhekaccaani vedayitaani uppajjanti. saamampi kho eta.m, siivaka, veditabba.m yathaa pittasamu.t.thaanaanipi idhekaccaani vedayitaani uppajjanti; lokassapi kho eta.m, siivaka, saccasammata.m yathaa pittasamu.t.thaanaanipi idhekaccaani vedayitaani uppajjanti. "Produced by (disorders of the) bile, there arise, Sivaka, certain kinds of feelings. That this happens, can be known by oneself; also in the world it is accepted as true.” “ ====================================================== 12609 From: Date: Fri Apr 12, 2002 4:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 3 (16-18) Hi, Kom (and Larry) - In a message dated 4/11/02 10:34:56 PM Eastern Daylight Time, kom@a... writes: > The mind-door (mano-dvara), the door by which the mind-door cittas arise, > is the bhavanga citta itself. > ======================= I don't understand this in a couple ways ways: First of all, bhavanga citta is supposed to be an act of consciousness whose object is (a repetition of) the object of the last death consciousness. Are you now saying that this very citta also has the additional function of serving as mental gateway? Secondly, it was my understanding that mind in bhavanga-citta mode is likened to a spider sitting in the middle of its web, waiting, and suddenly scurrying out after prey (an object) when the object is sensed. But what the mind adverts to can be of any sort. It could be any rupa or it could be a nama - a feeling, a memory, a thought, and emotion, etc. Why is the bhavanga citta especially the *mind* door? Also, once an adverting citta arises, the bhavanga citta has ceased; isn't that so. So wherein lies the "door" function" Exactly what is the function of being a "door"? Isn't it possible that when there is talk of a "sense door" - the eye door, ear door, body door, nose door, tongue door, and mind door, that this is merely a manner of speaking, for the purpose of describing the nature of a particular act of discernment, so that, for example, when the discernment of sight arises it is *said* that "the discernment arose through the eye door" to merely categorize the discernment as visual, and associate it with the physical eye (which, of course, plays an essential role in human and higher-animal vision), and when the discernment of a thought or feeling or disposition or emotion arises it is *said* that "the discernment arose through the mind door" to merely categorize the discernment as mental. [And in modern times, we would associate the phrase "mental discernment" with the physical brain (which, of course, plays an essential role in human cognition).] 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) 12610 From: goglerr Date: Fri Apr 12, 2002 9:14am Subject: [dsg] Re: Concepts & realities Dear Jon I was away for few days, sorry for the late reply. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Dear Lucy and Jon, > > > > Distinguishing of nama and rupa through reflection and thinking is > > praiseworthy (although theory is one of the precursor), but not > > enough to develop penetrating wisdom. > > A useful reminder, one which cannot be heard too often. As you say, correct > theoretical understanding of the difference between nama and rupa is a prerequisite > to the arising of the knowledge/insight that knows this difference directly. > > I found interesting the rest of your post in which you discuss the development of > insight by reference to the different kinds of lakkhana (briefly, if I have > understood you correctly, awareness of a dhamma leads to the seeing of it's > individual essence or characteristic, then to its nature of arising and falling, > then to the perception of anicca, dukkha and anatta in relation to the dhamma). > > I would agree that the 3 characteristics are not fully penetrated until > enlightenment is attained (I think this is clearly stated in the Visuddhimagga). I > would just like to add the suggestion that the development of the understanding of > these characteristics, and of the other characteristics you mention, actually begins > with the development of awareness and proceeds gradually as insight is accumulated. > But perhaps what you have said was not intended to suggest otherwise. G: You're right. Anicca, dukkha, anatta will unfold themselves gradually as the awareness deepens. The more the awareness of the realities of mind and body, the more subtle aspect of anicca, dukkha, anatta will arise i.e. deeper insight knowledge will arise. > Also, we should add into your progressive description somewhere the knowledge of the distinction between nama and rupa discussed above. To my understanding, it belongs at the very beginning, before even the knowledge of the individual essence or characteristic. Would you agree with this? G: If I get u correctly, do you mean that the knowledge of distinction of mind and body arises before seeing the individual essence? If u don't mean that, pls ignore the further explanation. If it is so, I beg to differ at this point. One has to see the individual essence for the insight to arise. Even at that insight knowledge or even any insight knowledge that is being developed, we have to keep searching/investigating for the individual essence (sabbhava) for the tilakkahana to unfold. For example we see the wind element by knowing it through tension, stiffness, movement of the body, or the fire element – heat or cold etc. and see them how they come and how they go and how they change. That means, at all times during practice, we have to see the sabhava. In the actual observation during the practice, once the sabhava lakkahana is being seen, at a particular moment, the other two lakkhanas will arises simultaneously. It only a matter of clear we are. When one (sabhava) we see all three lakkhana. We also do not differentiate them during noting because the mind will loose the momentum of concentration due to a lot of thinking comes in – thinking of `now, what is this lakkhana?', `hmmm, is this the tilakkhana?' and so on. We only see them as they are. Only for the sake of theory that we differentiate them out for clearer and easier understanding. > Finally, I note that in your `PS 1' you equate `sabhaava' with `visesa lakkhana'. > Could you expand a little on this for us? I would be particularly interested in any > textual references you may have. Many thanks. > Jon G: I got the reference that sabhava being synonymous with vivesa in the book `On the Path to Freedom' by Sayadaw U Pandita. I also checked the pali-english dictionary which they explain the meaning, no difference from one to the other. They also gave a lot of references on where they use the words in the Tipitaka and the commentaries. I am using Rhys Davids and Stede dictionary. Perhaps u may have some idea how they are different. Kindly share. Interesting sharing. T-h-a-n-k y-o-u. goglerr 12611 From: Date: Fri Apr 12, 2002 4:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (18-20)- Larry Thanks for all this great research Sarah [on water element and sanna]. One question, you say sanna marks but does not think. So what thinks? Also, does sanna remember? If so, is it responsible for all memory functions? thanks, Larry 12612 From: Date: Fri Apr 12, 2002 4:40pm Subject: RE: [dsg] ADL ch. 3 (16-18) Hi Kom, maybe you are right and it doesn't matter too much, but I was trying to understand the difference between citta and cetasika. The only difference I can think of is that dosa mula citta can (sometimes?) initiate kamma but dosa cetasika cannot. Suppose I touch a hot stove. The touch citta experiences HOT!, along wth it vedana cetasika experiences PAIN!; then with that dosa cetasika experiences aversion (it is unclear whether the object of dosa is hot or pain). Then anger arises due to conceit and ditthi ("I am hurt"). I would say this is dosa mula citta experiencing conceit and ditthi as anger, and this has the potential to create kamma. How would you analyze this? Can a cetasika arise without a citta? Every experience is so complex, it seems like there are many objects and sometimes it seems like several cetasikas are combined (sankhata?) into one and become an object to another citta. Does sanna cetasika take note of all cetasikas? Larry 12613 From: Ven. Dr. Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Fri Apr 12, 2002 6:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] dhamma courses http://www.vipassana.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "newthings_65" To: Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 3:02 AM Subject: [dsg] dhamma courses > Hi there all, > > I was wondering whether anyone knew of a correspondence course in > Dhamma/Buddhist Studies? > > Are there any on-line courses? > > Help!!! > > Metta > > Jo 12614 From: Sarah Date: Fri Apr 12, 2002 6:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] All That The Buddha Taught Was Abhidhamma Dear Suan (& Joyce), I liked this explanation below. In appreciation:-)) Sarah ===== --- abhidhammika wrote: > > > Now, why then is there the differentiation between Sutta Pitaka and > Abhidhamma Pitaka? > > The differentiation is not what they teach, but how they teach. > > When abhidhamma is spoon-fed to a particular listener, it is called a > Sutta. In fact, that particular sutta can even be named after that > listener. For example, Joyce Short Suttam. The Joyce Short Suttam > would be a segment of abhidhamma tailored to Joyce Short. > > When a Sutta is explained by drawing out all the possible > implications with or without their systemisation and reconstruction, > it becomes Abhidhamma. > > There you have it. > > Every time you read a Suttam, you are reading a segment or segments > of Abhidhamma. > > And when you come to the stage of feeling the need to know further > implications and their links related to the partial teachings in that > Suttam, then you are ready for listening to Abhidhamma Pitaka. ===================================================== 12615 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Apr 12, 2002 9:52pm Subject: RE: [dsg] ADL ch. 3 (16-18) Dear Larry, > -----Original Message----- > From: LBIDD@w... [mailto:LBIDD@w...] > Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 4:40 PM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [dsg] ADL ch. 3 (16-18) > > > Hi Kom, maybe you are right and it doesn't matter too much, but I was > trying to understand the difference between citta and cetasika. The only > difference I can think of is that dosa mula citta can (sometimes?) > initiate kamma but dosa cetasika cannot. I think you are definitely right to say that knowing the difference between cittas and cetasikas are important. What I suggested that may not be as important is to be able to explain exactly and correctly how the citta process manages to know the paramatha dhamma that has already fallen away (you suggested memory, and I logically concurred). When we talking about conascent states, I think they are truly intertwined with one another. Technically, only the cetana cetasika that is conascent with both the dosa-mula citta and dosa cetasikas is kamma, but we know that for that kamma to arise, the citta, the dosa-mula citta, and *all* other conascent states, must condition the kamma. > > Suppose I touch a hot stove. The touch citta experiences HOT!, along wth > it vedana cetasika experiences PAIN!; then with that dosa cetasika > experiences aversion (it is unclear whether the object of dosa is hot or > pain). Then anger arises due to conceit and ditthi ("I am hurt"). I > would say this is dosa mula citta experiencing conceit and ditthi as > anger, and this has the potential to create kamma. How would you analyze > this? Let's say this: 1) When touching of the stove occurs, there is citta, along with the pain (unpleasant bodily feeling), arising to experince HOT. You notice that the citta, along with the painful vedana, along with other conascent states, experience the same object: HOT. 2) After that, but still in the same panca-dvara vithi, dosa-mula citta, along with its conascent states including the mental pain (unpleasant mental feeling), arises to experience still the same object: HOT. 3) After that, in the immediately following mano-dvara vithi, dosa-mula citta still experience the same object, HOT, albeit the HOT in actuallity has already fallen away. 4) It can be only a bit later (not sure when) that there may be other dosa-mula cittas that experience (the already fallen away) the unpleasant bodily feeling in 1), or the unpleasant mental feeling in 2) or 3). 5) When we start thinking more about the combination of stuffs (heat, bodily pain, mental pain), then conceit and ditthi may arise, but as you know conceit and dithi only arises with lobha, and not dosa. 6) You have already demonstrated (which I agree) that this process is truly intricate. Each person can truly know this by wisdom, and not speculation (although it helps to understand that this is truly intricate). 7) My observation is that in our daily life, our attachment and anger are mostly due to the concept (that I am hurt, etc.). Do you notice that when you are angry for while (a few minutes), it is because you are thinking about the situation, although the trigger of that anger is already long gone. When someone cuts in front of me (while I am driving), the unpleasant visible objects only last (conventionally speaking) for a few seconds. But then, I will start fuming about how the other driver is a bad driver, or that I will be late for work, etc. 8) TA Sujin mentioned that anger arising out of realities are usually short (since the conditioned dhamma, the reality itself, doesn't last very long). This is in contrast to anger arising out of concepts (which neither rises or falls, albeit doesn't exist at the paramatha level) lasts for a long time (again, conventionally speaking). This is because concepts don't fall away. We continue to be angry as long as we continue thinking about the things that make us angry. > Can a cetasika arise without a citta? Every experience is so complex, it > seems like there are many objects and sometimes it seems like several > cetasikas are combined (sankhata?) into one and become an object to > another citta. Does sanna cetasika take note of all cetasikas? Cittas always arise with cetasikas, cetasikas always arise with citta. They cannot be separated. Experiences are complex because conditioned nama rises and falls incalculably fast. The co-arising citta and cetasikas cognize only one object at a time. It seems like they are combined because it is so fast. Sanna takes note of whatever is the aramana of both the citta and sanna (and other cetasikas), and nothing else. kom 12616 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Apr 12, 2002 10:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Coming Together of Conditions Rob K --- "robertkirkpatrick.rm" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > > If I am not mistaken, the paticca-samuppada is one of the aspects > of the dhamma > > that was contemplated by the Buddha in the weeks following his > enlightenment > > (i.e., rather than being something the realisation of which > contributed to his > > enlightenment). > > > >==========hk > Dear Jon, > Just a minor point. : On the eve just before full enlightenment in > the first watch the Buddha (to be) based on anapanasati realised > pubbenivasanussati-abhinna, (knowledge of lives), in the middle > watch, dibbacakkhu abhinna, (special vision) and finally he insighted > paticcasamuppada . This final stage of seeing into paticcasamuppada > happened just before dawn and upon its completion he became Buddha. > > In later weeks,in the vicinity of the Bodhi tree , he contempated in > detail the Patthana , the 24 conditions. This area is marked by a > marble plaque which you have probably seen at the site in Bodhgaya. > best wishes > robert Thanks for this correction. (Not such a minor point, perhaps!) BTW, any thoughts of your own on the question Howard and I are discussing, namely how the conditioning relationships that exist as between dhammas, and dependent origination in particular, are to be known would be welcome. Jon 12617 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Apr 12, 2002 10:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Coming Together of Conditions Howard Thanks very much for your further comments. Here’s how I see it. When dhammas are directly known by panna, they are known by degrees. At first, only their broad characteristic as either nama or rupa is known. As the understanding is developed, they are known in more detail, and at the same time more is known *about* them. Included in the things that are known as insight is developed further is the conditioned nature of the dhammas and the 3 characteristics of anicca, dukkha and anatta. We also need to keep in mind that the knowledge being developed by insight is knowledge of individual dhammas, not of the whole mass of dhammas collectively. So when we talk about the conditioned nature of dhammas being seen, we refer in fact to conditionality as a quality of an individual dhamma that is the object of insight, and likewise with the 3 characteristics. Now whether one describes this knowledge as being direct, inferential or whatever is not really of concern. The fact is, it is knowledge of/about dhammas that accrues from the direct experiencing of those dhammas by panna of the level of satipatthana, and not from any other source. This I understand to be the significance of the Satipatthana Sutta being described as the ‘direct way’. Jon --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - > > 1. The Abhidhamma as a detailed codification of what is to be known. > > The Abhidhamma is a codification of all phenomena that constitute samsara > > and nibbana, and of anything about those phenomena that is of relevance to the > > attainment of enlightenment. But that is not to say that everything in the > > Abhidhamma needs to be known. Enlightenment is attained when dhammas are > > known to the extent that their characteristics are penetrated and their true > > nature is seen. > > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Their true nature is relational, wherin lies their emptiness, their > being anatta. > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > 2. Conditionality as a general aspect of dhammas vs. paticca-samuppada. > > As I see it, there is a clear difference between *seeing the conditioned > > nature > > of dhammas* and a *detailed knowledge of various cnditioning factors at > > play at > > diferenct moments*. The former is required for enlightenment, the latter > > is the realm of great minds like the Buddha's. > --------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I agree with that. But the conditionality, to be truly known, must be > known directly, not just inferentially. Paticcasamupada, as traditionally > presented, begins with the general statement of conditionality, and then > specializes it to the conditionlity leading to the arising of > unsatisfactoriness. > -------------------------------------------------- > > > Understanding conditionality as being the general nature of things does not > > imply a knowledge of the number and kind of conditioning factors that may > > pertain at a given moment, although of course a degree of knowledge about > > different kinds of conditioning factors is necessary. > > If I am not mistaken, the paticca-samuppada is one of the aspects of the > > dhamma > > that was contemplated by the Buddha in the weeks following his > > enlightenment > > (i.e., rather than being something the realisation of which contributed to > > his enlightenment). > ------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > That may not be so. I believe Robert commented on this. > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > > 3. The 3 characteristics and the conditioned nature of dhammas. > > There is no doubt a close connection here, but I think that knowledge of > > these > > things is developed by directly experiencing and understanding dhammas > > themselves as they truly are, and not by 'studying' paticca-samuppada or > > the 3 characteristics. > > > ------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > This suggests that dhammas are static, separate things that are > individually directly observable, that there do somehow exist relations among > these separate things, but that the relations are only inferable by using > reason to compare the separate things, and not directly observable with > wisdom. This reminds me of the old billiard ball physics that used to be in > vogue, but I don't think it adequately expresses the Dhammic view of dhammas, > which seems to me to be more like that of things-in-relation, with the > relations at least as important as the "things" related. To truly see that > conditioned dhammas are dependently arisen, that seeing must be a direct > seeing, with wisdom, and not just an inference made on the basis of > comparisons of separate objects, or so it seems to me. > =========================== > With metta, > Howard 12618 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Apr 12, 2002 10:34pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts & realities Goglerr --- goglerr wrote: > Dear Jon > > I was away for few days, sorry for the late reply. Not a problem, G. (Anyway, your reply is not late by my standards!) > G: You're right. Anicca, dukkha, anatta will unfold themselves > gradually as the awareness deepens. The more the awareness of the > realities of mind and body, the more subtle aspect of anicca, dukkha, > anatta will arise i.e. deeper insight knowledge will arise. Yes, ‘unfolds’ describes it neatly. It happens in its own good time. Just a minor point. You refer here to ‘the realities of mind and body’. As a translation of ‘nama and rupa’ I think ‘mind and body’ can be misleading, since the realties that comprise the present moment include realities that we don't take for either mind or body, and which also can be (and need to be) the object of awareness. > > Also, we should add into your progressive description somewhere the > knowledge of the distinction between nama and rupa discussed above. > To my understanding, it belongs at the very beginning, before even > the knowledge of the individual essence or characteristic. Would you > agree with this? > > G: If I get u correctly, do you mean that the knowledge of > distinction of mind and body arises before seeing the individual > essence? If u don't mean that, pls ignore the further > explanation. If it is so, I beg to differ at this point. One has to > see the individual essence for the insight to arise. Even at that > insight knowledge or even any insight knowledge that is being > developed, we have to keep searching/investigating for the individual > essence (sabbhava) for the tilakkahana to unfold. For example we see > the wind element by knowing it through tension, stiffness, movement > of the body, or the fire element – heat or cold etc. and see them how > they come and how they go and how they change. That means, at all > times during practice, we have to see the sabhava. In the actual > observation during the practice, once the sabhava lakkahana is being > seen, at a particular moment, the other two lakkhanas will arises > simultaneously. It only a matter of clear we are. When one (sabhava) > we see all three lakkhana. We also do not differentiate them during > noting because the mind will loose the momentum of concentration due > to a lot of thinking comes in – thinking of `now, what is this > lakkhana?', `hmmm, is this the tilakkhana?' and so on. We only see > them as they are. Only for the sake of theory that we differentiate > them out for clearer and easier understanding. Yes, you have read me correctly. ;-) To my understanding, the aspect of nama-ness or rupa-ness is the first thing that is known about any reality, before even its individual essence. I believe this idea is based in part on the fact that the first of the 16 stages of understanding leading to the first stage of enlightenment is given as ‘the knowledge of the defining of nama and rupa’. Perhaps more importantly, I would say that we have no control over what aspect understanding sees when it arises. So it is not a matter of trying to direct attention to nama-ness/rupa-ness or to the sabhava lakkhana in particular. > G: I got the reference that sabhava being synonymous with vivesa in > the book `On the Path to Freedom' by Sayadaw U Pandita. I also > checked the pali-english dictionary which they explain the meaning, > no difference from one to the other. They also gave a lot of > references on where they use the words in the Tipitaka and the > commentaries. I am using Rhys Davids and Stede dictionary. Perhaps u > may have some idea how they are different. Kindly share. Thanks. I will check the PED as soon as I have a chance to do so. Does the Ven author of the other book give any source for his statement? I would be most interested to see it if he does. > Interesting sharing. T-h-a-n-k y-o-u. > > goglerr And thanks to you, too, G. Jon 12619 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Apr 12, 2002 11:58pm Subject: RE: [dsg] ADL ch. 3 (16-18): mind door, sense door Dear Howard, This is a very good question (which means I cannot answer). I hope others will contribute in details. As far as I understand, the 5 senses and bhavanga are said to be doors because they are ways for which the citta process arises (between bhavanga). Without the door way, the citta arising through that particular door cannot arise. This emphasizes the conditionality/relationship between the door, be it rupa or nama, and the cittas and cetasikas. A sense door way (a pasada rupa) serves more than just being the door way: it also serves as as the place from which the vinnana (seeing, hearing, etc.) citta and its associated cittas arise. The bhavanga doesn't have such duty for the cittas and cetasikas that follow it. I know this just contributes unrelated bits and pieces, but hope it is useful anyway. ;=) kom > -----Original Message----- > From: upasaka@a... [mailto:upasaka@a...] > Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 8:32 AM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 3 (16-18) > > > Hi, Kom (and Larry) - > > In a message dated 4/11/02 10:34:56 PM Eastern > Daylight Time, > kom@a... writes: > > > I don't understand this in a couple ways ways: > First of all, bhavanga citta is supposed > to be an act of consciousness > whose object is (a repetition of) the object of ... 12620 From: Date: Sat Apr 13, 2002 1:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 3 (16-18) Hi. Kom (and Larry) - In a message dated 4/13/02 12:53:32 AM Eastern Daylight Time, kom@a... writes: > > Let's say this: > 1) When touching of the stove occurs, there is citta, along with the pain > (unpleasant bodily feeling), arising to experince HOT. You notice that the > citta, along with the painful vedana, along with other conascent states, > experience the same object: HOT. > > 2) After that, but still in the same panca-dvara vithi, dosa-mula citta, > along with its conascent states including the mental pain (unpleasant > mental > feeling), arises to experience still the same object: HOT. > > 3) After that, in the immediately following mano-dvara vithi, dosa-mula > citta still experience the same object, HOT, albeit the HOT in actuallity > has already fallen away. > > 4) It can be only a bit later (not sure when) that there may be other > dosa-mula cittas that experience (the already fallen away) the unpleasant > bodily feeling in 1), or the unpleasant mental feeling in 2) or 3). > > ================================== This looks really good to my uneducated eye. I do have two comments: 1) With regard to your number (2), it does seems to me that the aversion is to the pain, not to the rupa of strong heat, although we do make the association with the heat, since it is from the contact with heat that the pain arises; it is heat-conditioned pain. I say this, because of the contact -> vedana and vedana -> tanha links in paticcasamupada as well as my own understanding. 2) One thing I seem to see missing from your clear analysis is the entry of sa~n~na into the mix. It is after the vedana (whether it be pain, in the case of very strong heat, or a milder sensation in the case of a weaker heat) that one ffrst perceives/recognizes the heat AS HEAT. With contact as condition arises feeling; what one feels, one perceives (cognizes). This is how it is described in the suttas. 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) 12621 From: Date: Sat Apr 13, 2002 1:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Coming Together of Conditions Hi, Jon - In a message dated 4/13/02 1:34:01 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > > Howard > > Thanks very much for your further comments. Here’s how I see it. > > When dhammas are directly known by panna, they are known by degrees. At > first, > only their broad characteristic as either nama or rupa is known. As the > understanding is developed, they are known in more detail, and at the same > time > more is known *about* them. > > Included in the things that are known as insight is developed further is > the > conditioned nature of the dhammas and the 3 characteristics of anicca, > dukkha > and anatta. > > We also need to keep in mind that the knowledge being developed by insight > is > knowledge of individual dhammas, not of the whole mass of dhammas > collectively. > So when we talk about the conditioned nature of dhammas being seen, we > refer > in fact to conditionality as a quality of an individual dhamma that is the > object of insight, and likewise with the 3 characteristics. > ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Conditionality is a relation, Jon, not a property. Dhammas are conditionally arisen. This cannot be seen by staring at individual dhammas. ---------------------------------------------------- > > Now whether one describes this knowledge as being direct, inferential or > whatever is not really of concern. The fact is, it is knowledge of/about > dhammas that accrues from the direct experiencing of those dhammas by panna > of > the level of satipatthana, and not from any other source. This I > understand to > be the significance of the Satipatthana Sutta being described as the ‘ > direct > way’. > > Jon > > ========================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 12622 From: goglerr Date: Sat Apr 13, 2002 7:09am Subject: [dsg] Re: Concepts & realities >Does the Ven author of the other book give any source for his statement? I would be most interested to see it if he does. Jon, Unfortunately, he didn't :( G 12623 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Apr 13, 2002 9:05am Subject: RE: [dsg] ADL ch. 3 (16-18): the discussion of HEAT and vedana Dear Howard, Thanks for your comments. > -----Original Message----- > From: upasaka@a... [mailto:upasaka@a...] > Sent: Saturday, April 13, 2002 5:42 AM > > > > Let's say this: > > 1) When touching of the stove occurs, there is > citta, along with the pain > > (unpleasant bodily feeling), arising to > experince HOT. You notice that the > > citta, along with the painful vedana, along > with other conascent states, > > experience the same object: HOT. > > > > 2) After that, but still in the same > panca-dvara vithi, dosa-mula citta, > > along with its conascent states including the > mental pain (unpleasant > > mental > > feeling), arises to experience still the same > object: HOT. > > > > 3) After that, in the immediately following > mano-dvara vithi, dosa-mula > > citta still experience the same object, HOT, > albeit the HOT in actuallity > > has already fallen away. > > > > 4) It can be only a bit later (not sure when) > that there may be other > > dosa-mula cittas that experience (the already > fallen away) the unpleasant > > bodily feeling in 1), or the unpleasant mental > feeling in 2) or 3). > > > > > ================================== > This looks really good to my uneducated > eye. I do have two comments: > 1) With regard to your number (2), it does > seems to me that the > aversion is to the pain, not to the rupa of > strong heat, although we do make > the association with the heat, since it is from > the contact with heat that > the pain arises; it is heat-conditioned pain. I > say this, because of the > contact -> vedana and vedana -> tanha links in > paticcasamupada as well as my > own understanding. In the very precise explanation of the abhidhamma, all the nama in the sense door, including the aversion that we dicuss in (2), must be experiencing the sense object, which in this case is heat. Also on the same token, the aversion that arises in the mind door immediately following (3), also experiences again the same sense object. The model is pretty strict: there can be no other way. The aversion toward the vedana (either the painful bodily feeling, or the unplesant mental feeling [arising with aversion]) can only come later through the mind door (and never the sense door). But again, later here means blindingly fast. There is no other phenomenon that is faster than the rising and falling away of namas. Conventionally speaking, both you and Larry are absolutely right that for us, we will predominantly notice the bodily painful feeling and the unpleasant mental feeling. We are completely driven by vedana, be it pleasant or unpleasant. In the abhidhamma model, any painful bodily feeling results from a contact with one of the three sense object (hardness, heat, or tactile), but when we feel pain, do we notice that sense object? When I have pain in my arm, for example, I would definitely notice the pain, but I certainly don't notice any sense object, but yet intellectually (by abhidhamma explanation), the sense object must be there. > 2) One thing I seem to see missing from > your clear analysis is the > entry of sa~n~na into the mix. It is after the > vedana (whether it be pain, in > the case of very strong heat, or a milder > sensation in the case of a weaker > heat) that one ffrst perceives/recognizes the > heat AS HEAT. With contact as > condition arises feeling; what one feels, one > perceives (cognizes). This is > how it is described in the suttas. > You are absolutely right here. My explanation is simplistic, excluding the sanna and further details on sankhara kandhas. I was hoping that by excluding those, it is more manageable (although may mislead some) to understand. Sanna is very important in the scenario. Because of the sanna (and the blinding speeds of the namas), the ignorant mass (that's me!) don't see the rising and falling away of the dhammas, and mistake them as being us, being ours (our pain, my body, etc.). Sankhara kandhas (dosa, moha, vitakka, etc), especially kamma, are also present. Being angry, we may take this out on somebody else (an unpleasant stare, or word), and this certainly will cause unpleasant vipaka in the future. As Num has been discussing recently: the three cycles here is complete. Vipaka vatta [feeling painful bodily feeling], kilesa vatta [anger], and kamma vatta [stare, or word with anger]. Just one more comment on your comment here "With contact as condition arises feeling; what one feels, one perceives (cognizes)", I have somehow understood here that the perception here is sanna (marking, recalling) instead of cognition. I will need to verify this (unless other people say something first!). kom 12624 From: Date: Sat Apr 13, 2002 5:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 3 (16-18): the discussion of HEAT and vedana Hi, Kom - In a message dated 4/13/02 12:12:23 PM Eastern Daylight Time, kom@a... writes: > Dear Howard, > > Thanks for your comments. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: upasaka@a... [mailto:upasaka@a...] > > Sent: Saturday, April 13, 2002 5:42 AM > > > > > > Let's say this: > > > 1) When touching of the stove occurs, there is > > citta, along with the pain > > > (unpleasant bodily feeling), arising to > > experince HOT. You notice that the > > > citta, along with the painful vedana, along > > with other conascent states, > > > experience the same object: HOT. > > > > > > 2) After that, but still in the same > > panca-dvara vithi, dosa-mula citta, > > > along with its conascent states including the > > mental pain (unpleasant > > > mental > > > feeling), arises to experience still the same > > object: HOT. > > > > > > 3) After that, in the immediately following > > mano-dvara vithi, dosa-mula > > > citta still experience the same object, HOT, > > albeit the HOT in actuallity > > > has already fallen away. > > > > > > 4) It can be only a bit later (not sure when) > > that there may be other > > > dosa-mula cittas that experience (the already > > fallen away) the unpleasant > > > bodily feeling in 1), or the unpleasant mental > > feeling in 2) or 3). > > > > > > > > ================================== > > This looks really good to my uneducated > > eye. I do have two comments: > > 1) With regard to your number (2), it does > > seems to me that the > > aversion is to the pain, not to the rupa of > > strong heat, although we do make > > the association with the heat, since it is from > > the contact with heat that > > the pain arises; it is heat-conditioned pain. I > > say this, because of the > > contact -> vedana and vedana -> tanha links in > > paticcasamupada as well as my > > own understanding. > > In the very precise explanation of the abhidhamma, all the > nama in the sense door, including the aversion that we > dicuss in (2), must be experiencing the sense object, which > in this case is heat. Also on the same token, the aversion > that arises in the mind door immediately following (3), also > experiences again the same sense object. The model is > pretty strict: there can be no other way. > > The aversion toward the vedana (either the painful bodily > feeling, or the unplesant mental feeling [arising with > aversion]) can only come later through the mind door (and > never the sense door). But again, later here means > blindingly fast. There is no other phenomenon that is > faster than the rising and falling away of namas. > ----------------------------------------------- Howard: I understand the point being made, and it may well be correct. But my every intuition and experience, increasingly with mindfulness practice, is that craving and aversion are oriented directly towards vedana (or the fresh memory of vedana), and only indirectly to the object-of-contact that led to the vedana. The opposite view would be one that I would have to take completely on faith. Were I to see that view clearly expressed in the suttas, I would be more inclined to accept it on faith. Do you know of any such suttic support? --------------------------------------------------- > > Conventionally speaking, both you and Larry are absolutely > right that for us, we will predominantly notice the bodily > painful feeling and the unpleasant mental feeling. We are > completely driven by vedana, be it pleasant or unpleasant. > In the abhidhamma model, any painful bodily feeling results > from a contact with one of the three sense object (hardness, > heat, or tactile), but when we feel pain, do we notice that > sense object? When I have pain in my arm, for example, I > would definitely notice the pain, but I certainly don't > notice any sense object, but yet intellectually (by > abhidhamma explanation), the sense object must be there. > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: The pain in one's arm occurs *after* the observed assault on the arm, i.e. after the body-door contact, at which time the original contact has already *ceased*, and the reaction of aversion follows after that. So, what "object" can be present at the time of the aversion? If it is a memory, which it surely must be, it is more likely to be the more recent memory of the pain, rather than of the hard touching which preceded the pain. ---------------------------------------------------- > > > 2) One thing I seem to see missing from > > your clear analysis is the > > entry of sa~n~na into the mix. It is after the > > vedana (whether it be pain, in > > the case of very strong heat, or a milder > > sensation in the case of a weaker > > heat) that one ffrst perceives/recognizes the > > heat AS HEAT. With contact as > > condition arises feeling; what one feels, one > > perceives (cognizes). This is > > how it is described in the suttas. > > > > You are absolutely right here. My explanation is > simplistic, excluding the sanna and further details on > sankhara kandhas. I was hoping that by excluding those, it > is more manageable (although may mislead some) to > understand. Sanna is very important in the scenario. > Because of the sanna (and the blinding speeds of the namas), > the ignorant mass (that's me!) don't see the rising and > falling away of the dhammas, and mistake them as being us, > being ours (our pain, my body, etc.). Sankhara kandhas > (dosa, moha, vitakka, etc), especially kamma, are also > present. Being angry, we may take this out on somebody else > (an unpleasant stare, or word), and this certainly will > cause unpleasant vipaka in the future. As Num has been > discussing recently: the three cycles here is complete. > Vipaka vatta [feeling painful bodily feeling], kilesa vatta > [anger], and kamma vatta [stare, or word with anger]. > > Just one more comment on your comment here "With contact as > condition arises feeling; what one feels, one perceives > (cognizes)", I have somehow understood here that the > perception here is sanna (marking, recalling) instead of > cognition. I will need to verify this (unless other people > say something first!). ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: I should have said "recognition" rather than "cognition". ---------------------------------------------------- > > kom > ========================== 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) 12625 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Apr 13, 2002 9:54am Subject: Abhidhamma, to Suan Dear Suan, thank you for your excellent post on Abhidhamma. You explained very clearly that the Buddha taught Abhidhamma all the time. Ultimate realities, as taught in the Abhidhamma, are the objects of the development of right understanding that leads to the eradication of defilements, and only Buddhas teach Abhidhamma. I like the way you explain that in the Suttanta there is spoonfeeding of Abhidhamma, depending on the capacity of understanding of the listeners. Anumodana, Nina. 12626 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Apr 13, 2002 9:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] ayurveda Dear Sarah, thank you for your notes on ayurveda, very interesting. In India I bought ayurveda bathpowder, it is excellent. Now, the three of bile. phlegm and winds are again also referred to in the subco I now try to translate. (better for psg only?) In the dictionary it states for pitta: the organ of the bile as well as the fluids. I appreciate your series from the Mahavamsa, what a good preparation of your trip. I hope to hear about all the places you will visit. Kind regards, Nina. op 12-04-2002 15:31 schreef Sarah op sarahdhhk@y...: > > > I wrote before about the references to bile (pitta) in the text (see end > of post )and how I believe this needs to be understood from the Ayurveda > point of view to be understood. Disorders or disturbances of the pitta > type can thus be easily observed. > > I’ve just come across B.Bodhi’s translation of the sutta and notice he > refers to bile disorders, phlegm disorders and wind disorders.and adds a > note at the back to say (p1435) “that bile (pitta), phlegm (semha), and > wind (vaata) are the three bodily humours (dosa) of Indian Ayurveda > medicine.” > “The concept of constitution (prakriti) is central to Ayurveda. > Individuals are comprised of the 3 forces (Vata, Pitta, Kapha) in unique > combinations so that no 2 persons are alike. > > “Vata controls all movement in the body such as respiration, circulation, > elimination and the flow of nerve impulses to and from the brain. Pitta > governs digestion and assimilation of food and liquids throughout the > body. Kapha governs protection through the mucus membranes and stability > through bone structure.” > 12627 From: Date: Sat Apr 13, 2002 7:02am Subject: A Question of Reference Hi, all - Nina, Sarah, Jon, Robert K and others believe that Abhidhamma Pitaka was, obviously with the exception of works like the Kathavatthu, created by the Buddha. I would be very interested in seeing two categories of things: (1) References to suttas in the Abhidhamma Pitaka, and (2) References to parts of the Abhidhamma Pitaka in the Sutta Pitaka. Are these to be found, and, if so, where? 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) 12628 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Apr 13, 2002 0:06pm Subject: RE: [dsg] ADL ch. 3 (16-18): the discussion of HEAT and vedana Dear Howard, > -----Original Message----- > From: upasaka@a... [mailto:upasaka@a...] > Howard: > I understand the point being made, and it > may well be correct. But my > every intuition and experience, increasingly with > mindfulness practice, is > that craving and aversion are oriented directly > towards vedana (or the fresh > memory of vedana), and only indirectly to the > object-of-contact that led to > the vedana. The opposite view would be one that I > would have to take > completely on faith. Were I to see that view > clearly expressed in the suttas, > I would be more inclined to accept it on faith. > Do you know of any such > suttic support? > --------------------------------------------------- I think it is good that we try to verify what we hear from the references. But, 1) I don't know of a sutta corresponding to this (my knowledge of the tipitakas is limited). Anyone else know of a sutta? 2) The abhidhamma tipitaka explains the dhammas in much more explicit details than the sutta. I don't think you will find the level of details correspond exactly, but at the end, I believe the dhamma pointed by the references are the same. How one benefits from them obviously are based on accumulations. > ---------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > The pain in one's arm occurs *after* the > observed assault on the arm, > i.e. after the body-door contact, at which time > the original contact has > already *ceased*, and the reaction of aversion > follows after that. So, what > "object" can be present at the time of the > aversion? If it is a memory, which > it surely must be, it is more likely to be the > more recent memory of the > pain, rather than of the hard touching which > preceded the pain. I was thinking about the pain in my arm when I am typing (because of unhealthy posture). The apparent assault is probably tension (which I didn't figure out in the last email). Thanks again for reminding me about the intricacies/speed of the dhammas. > ----------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I should have said "recognition" rather > than "cognition". > -------------------------------------------------- Thanks for the correction. kom 12629 From: frank kuan Date: Sat Apr 13, 2002 1:57pm Subject: 5 aggss is dukkha, 5 aggs of clinging more dukkha --- upasaka@a... wrote: ... The Buddha, while alive, "had" all five > khandhas, but the Buddha was > beyond suffering. So it cannot be the khandhas per > se, that are dukkha, but > the five khandhas affected by clinging. That's as I > see it. I think it really comes down to how suffering is defined. If suffering includes painful feeling, which enlightened beings continue to experience, then I think it's fair to say that before parinibbana, the Buddha still experienced some suffering from 5 mere aggregates. If suffering only means extraneous and unecessary MENTAL suffering created due to failure to correctly perceive reality, and does not include raw physical pain, then I would agree with Howard's statement, which does seem to be the popular view among Buddhists and canonical support, i.e. 3rd noble truth. If cessation of suffering is seen from a broader scope, i.e. the end of infinite cycle of rebirth into samsara, then even physical pain is just a trifling problem and it is fair to say there is cessation of dukkha, with physical pain being negligible compared to the infinite mental and physical pain from cyclic existence. The objection I have with the commonly accepted definition of cessation of dukkha is that it gives the impression that enlightened people feel no physical pain, and walk around with a sublime smile on their face all the time. -fk 12630 From: Date: Sat Apr 13, 2002 4:53pm Subject: RE: [dsg] ADL ch. 3 (16-18) Thanks Kom, very interesting analysis. I didn't know that conceit and ditthi only arise with lobha; maybe I need to look into this and see which cetasikas go with which cittas. Also I'm a little puzzled that sanna only marks aramanas. It seems that we could be aware of everything and thereby remember everything. Also I'm still uncomfortable with the way we are handling concepts; 'thinking' has many aspects which we haven't really explored yet. I'll have to do a little more study before pursuing this. thanks, Larry 12631 From: Date: Sat Apr 13, 2002 1:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 5 aggss is dukkha, 5 aggs of clinging more dukkha I've been considering the "5 Khandha's" and the "5 Upadanakhandha's". Sabbe Sankhara Dukkha and the ti-lakkhana-3 characteristics of conditioned Dhamma's being Anicca,Dukkha,Anatta. The 5 Khandha's being conditioned would be Dukkha. It is Dukkha that rises, Dukkha that remains, Dukkha that departs, nothing rises else than Dukkha, and nothing ceases else than Dukkha'(S.i, 135) The material form in what has thus come to be is included in the material form aggregate affected by clinging.The feeling in what has thus come to be is included in the feeling aggregate affected by clinging. The perception in what has thus come to be is included in the perception aggregate affected by clinging. The formations in what has thus come to be is included in the formation aggregate affected by clinging. The consciousness in what has thus come to be is included in the consciousness aggregate affected by clinging. Mahahatthipadopama Sutta To my understanding any rupa,vedana,sanna,sankhara or vinnana that has "thus come to be" is to be included in the 5 Upadanakhandha's, because they are "capable of being taken as objects of clinging" (and perhapes as the basis that all clinging arises,ie a condition for clinging (?)) and in the case of a Arahants mundane khandha's they can be taken as objects of clinging by others(see Atthasalini 347). And any rupa,vedana,sanna,sankhara or vinnana that has "thus come to be" is to be considered as Dukkha(sankhara-dukkhata)because they are conditioned Dhamma's There are three kinds of suffering:(1)suffering as pain (dukkha-dukkhata ), (2)the suffering inherent in the formations (sankhara- dukkhata ),(3)the suffering in change (viparnama- dukkhata )(S.XLV,165;D.33). Manual of Buddhist Terms & Doctrines by Ven.Nyanatiloka This leads to questions on the 3rd Noble Truth, but I'll wait untill I see any replies to this email, to make sure I am understanding this correctly. with Metta Stigan P.S. I have just returned from a break, so i think there were a few emails to me that I hadn't replied to, I will try to catch up soon. 12632 From: Date: Sat Apr 13, 2002 1:37pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A Question of Reference Hi Not really from the Sutta's nor is it in ref. to parts of the Abhidhamma, but a little quote from the Vinaya, where the 3 "baskets" are mentioned together. "If, having asked for leave in regard to Suttana, she asks about Vinaya or Abhidhamma,there is an offence of expiation".:Nun's Pacittiya XCV. With Metta Stigan > --------------------------------------- > Nina, Sarah, Jon, Robert K and others believe that Abhidhamma Pitaka > > was, obviously with the exception of works like the Kathavatthu, created by > > the Buddha. I would be very interested in seeing two categories of things: > (1) References to suttas in the Abhidhamma Pitaka, and (2) References to > parts of the Abhidhamma Pitaka in the Sutta Pitaka. Are these to be found, > and, if so, where? > > With metta, > Howard > ------------------------------------------ 12633 From: Date: Sat Apr 13, 2002 4:29pm Subject: RE: [dsg] ADL ch. 3 (16-18) <<<<< 1) The mind-door (mano-dvara), the door by which the mind-door cittas arise, is the bhavanga citta itself. 2) The mind-base / mental-base (manayatana) include all 89 cittas (vinnana khandha) 3) The mind-object-base (dhammayatana) includes 16 refined rupa, all 52 cetasikas, and nibbana. 4) The mental objects (dhammaramana), objects that can be known only through the mind-door process, includes all dhammayatana, 5 sense rupa (sense door), all manayatana, and pannati. >>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Dear Kom, Larry and ADL group; Kom this is a very good summary, very concise. I really like it. I thought about this with help from Nina and Sarah a while back ago. I hope you do not mind me adding some more to make it really clear. Larry, let me throw this on the table first; there are 28 rupas in ultimate sense: 5 sense rupa, 16 refined rupa and 7 vissayarupas (rupas which are objects of 5-senses-conscious (color (vanna), taste (rasa), smell (kandha), sound (sadda), heat/cold (tejo) hardness/softness (pathavi) and tension (vayo)). Panca-dvara-vithi (5-sense-door-process) can know only 7 vissayarupa. The rupa has to be existed at that present moment of the 5 -sense-door process. Mano-dvara-vithi (mind-door-process) can know both dhammaramana and 7 vissayarupas. Kom has already given a very concise definition of dhammaramana. And yes, dhammaramana can be known only through the mind-door-process. The point which is somewhat hidden here is the 7 vissayarupas can also be known through mind-door-process but as a past objects. Dhammaramana as an object in mind-door-process can be past, present, future or even time-independent (refer to panatti and nibbana). Hmm, hope it's not too complicated. And let me quote a line from a book, to lighten up your head a little bit. I think it's still somewhat related to the topic. I like it a lot. "On ne voit bien qu'avec le coeur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux." "It's only with the heart that one can see rightly. What is essential is invisible to the eye." (from Le Petit Prince) Best wishes. Num 12634 From: Date: Sat Apr 13, 2002 8:52pm Subject: RE: [dsg] ADL ch. 3 (16-18): mind door, sense door Howard & Kom, here are a couple of comments from 'A Comprehensive Manual Of Abhidhamma': p.130 'The life continuum is called the mind door': Unlike the first five doors, the mind door (manodvara) is not material but mental (nama), namely, the bhavanga consciousness. When an object is to be cognized by a mind-door process, the cittas belonging to that process gain access to the object solely through the mind door, without immediate dependence on any material sense faculty. Different commentaries express contrary opinions about the precise denotation of the mind door. The 'Vibhavini-Tika' states that the bhavanga citta immediately preceeding the mind-door adverting consciousness, i.e. the arrest bhavanga (bhavanga-upacheda), is the mind door. Other Abhidhamma commentaries identify the mind door as the bhavanga citta together with the mind-door adverting. However, Ledi Sayadaw and the commentary to the 'Vibhanga' both state that the entire bhavanga without distinction is the mind door. Acariya Anuruddha did not make any specifications but simply stated that the bhavanga is called the mind door. p. 152: The six types of cognitive processes are conveniently divided into two groups--the five-door process (pancadvaravithi), which includes the five processes occuring at each of the physical sense doors; and the mind-door process (manodvaravithi), which comprises all processes that occur solely at the mind door. Since the bhavanga is also the channel from which the five-door processes emerge, the latter are sometimes called mixed door processes (missaka-dvaravithi) as they involve both the mind door and a physical sense door. The processes that occur solely at the mind door are then called bare mind-door processes (suddha-manodvaravitthi) since they emerge from the bhavanga alone without the instrumentality of a physical sense door. ------------------- L: In other words all six sense processes interrupt the flow of the bhavanga and metaphorically arise in that channel but the physical sense process is initiated at the physical sense doors while the mental process is initiated at the bhavanga stream and hence called mind door. Another note: apparently what I was calling sanna in our discussion of 'touching hot stove' was actually several citta functions in the citta cognitive process, i.e. investigating, determining, and registration. Not sure how sanna or the other cetasikas fit into this process. Larry 12635 From: Date: Sat Apr 13, 2002 9:45pm Subject: RE: [dsg] ADL ch. 3 (16-18) Hi Num, would this be the heart-base (hadayavatthu)??? ;-) Larry ------------ "On ne voit bien qu'avec le coeur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux." "It's only with the heart that one can see rightly. What is essential is invisible to the eye." (from Le Petit Prince) 12636 From: Date: Sat Apr 13, 2002 6:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A Question of Reference Hi, Stigan - In a message dated 4/13/02 9:08:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Bodhi2500@a... writes: > > Hi > Not really from the Sutta's nor is it in ref. to parts of the Abhidhamma, > but > a little quote from the Vinaya, where the 3 "baskets" are mentioned > together. > > "If, having asked for leave in regard to Suttana, she asks about Vinaya or > Abhidhamma,there is an offence of expiation".:Nun's Pacittiya XCV. > > With Metta > Stigan ============================ Thank you. This is very interesting. With metta, Howard > > > --------------------------------------- > > Nina, Sarah, Jon, Robert K and others believe that Abhidhamma > Pitaka > > > > was, obviously with the exception of works like the Kathavatthu, created > by > > > > the Buddha. I would be very interested in seeing two categories of > things: > > (1) References to suttas in the Abhidhamma Pitaka, and (2) References to > > parts of the Abhidhamma Pitaka in the Sutta Pitaka. Are these to be > found, > > and, if so, where? > > > > 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) 12637 From: Date: Sat Apr 13, 2002 6:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 3 (16-18): mind door, sense door Hi, Larry (and Kom) - Thanks for the following. It has wonderful detail. Your mention of "Other Abhidhamma commentaries identify the mind door as the bhavanga citta together with the mind-door adverting." is what makes most sense to me in all of this. With metta, Howard In a message dated 4/13/02 11:53:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > > Howard & Kom, > here are a couple of comments from 'A Comprehensive Manual Of > Abhidhamma': > > p.130 'The life continuum is called the mind door': Unlike the first > five doors, the mind door (manodvara) is not material but mental (nama), > namely, the bhavanga consciousness. When an object is to be cognized by > a mind-door process, the cittas belonging to that process gain access to > the object solely through the mind door, without immediate dependence on > any material sense faculty. > > Different commentaries express contrary opinions about the precise > denotation of the mind door. The 'Vibhavini-Tika' states that the > bhavanga citta immediately preceeding the mind-door adverting > consciousness, i.e. the arrest bhavanga (bhavanga-upacheda), is the mind > door. Other Abhidhamma commentaries identify the mind door as the > bhavanga citta together with the mind-door adverting. However, Ledi > Sayadaw and the commentary to the 'Vibhanga' both state that the entire > bhavanga without distinction is the mind door. Acariya Anuruddha did not > make any specifications but simply stated that the bhavanga is called > the mind door. > > p. 152: The six types of cognitive processes are conveniently divided > into two groups--the five-door process (pancadvaravithi), which includes > the five processes occuring at each of the physical sense doors; and the > mind-door process (manodvaravithi), which comprises all processes that > occur solely at the mind door. Since the bhavanga is also the channel > from which the five-door processes emerge, the latter are sometimes > called mixed door processes (missaka-dvaravithi) as they involve both > the mind door and a physical sense door. The processes that occur solely > at the mind door are then called bare mind-door processes > (suddha-manodvaravitthi) since they emerge from the bhavanga alone > without the instrumentality of a physical sense door. > ------------------- > > L: In other words all six sense processes interrupt the flow of the > bhavanga and metaphorically arise in that channel but the physical sense > process is initiated at the physical sense doors while the mental > process is initiated at the bhavanga stream and hence called mind door. > > Another note: apparently what I was calling sanna in our discussion of > 'touching hot stove' was actually several citta functions in the citta > cognitive process, i.e. investigating, determining, and registration. > Not sure how sanna or the other cetasikas fit into this process. > > Larry > > /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) 12638 From: Date: Sat Apr 13, 2002 7:00pm Subject: Heart Base I have a question for this group. As I understand it, Abhidhamma claims that the physical heart is the base for mind consciousness. (Not the brain.) Does anyone have an explanation for what appears to be a gross error on the part of the Abhidhamma compilers? Thanks for whatever insights you might have. TG 12639 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Apr 13, 2002 11:45pm Subject: RE: [dsg] ADL ch. 3 (16-18): mind door, sense door Dear Larry, Much appreciation for the post. kom > -----Original Message----- > From: LBIDD@w... [mailto:LBIDD@w...] > > > Howard & Kom, > here are a couple of comments from 'A > Comprehensive Manual Of > Abhidhamma': 12640 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Apr 13, 2002 11:52pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Doors - mind door, sense door Larry Thanks for the very apposite quote from CMA. I would just like to quote a little more extensively from the same passage, as it seems to address 1 or 2 specific questions raised in earlier posts. The first of these is, what exactly is meant by the function of being a door? From the passage quoted below it seems that 'door' is to be understood in the metaphorical sense of being the *medium by which the relevant consciousness interacts with the objective world*, or by which *citta and cetasikas go out to meet the object and by which objects enter into range of the citta and cetasikas*. The second one is, how can bhavanga citta be said to perform this function when its 'normal' function is so markedly different? The key here, I think, is the fact that bhavanga citta is said to arise continuously throughout every moment of our lives except when it is interrupted by a sense- or mind-door process (and so there are bhavanga citta arising even now 'in between' the apparently continuous stream of sense- and mind-door processes of which we are conscious). In the case of a sense-door process, this interruption of the bhavanga citta requires the contemporaneous arising of a particular rupa in conjunction with the cittas of the sense-door process (and, significantly, this rupa is conditioned by kamma, so its arising at any given moment cannot be taken for granted). In the mind-door process, however, there is no such rupa and so it is the bhavanga citta itself that is said (metaphorically) to be the 'door'. It is also useful to bear in mind that these ways of classifying dhammas (as doors, as bases, as elements, etc.) are merely different ways of slicing things so that we can see dhammas from different angles. What is helpful for one person may not have any particular appeal to another, but in my experience even if we don’t find something particularly meaningful at first it is usually well worth keeping it in mind and coming back to it from time to time. Jon A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma, Ch III Compendium of Doors (dvaarasangaha) #12 - Text "In the compendium of doors, there are six doors, namely: eye door, ear door, nose door, tongue door, body door, and mind door. "Therein, the eye itself is the eye door; and so for the ear door and the others. But the life-continuum is called the mind door." #12 - Guide [1/. In what sense 'door'] "The term "door" ('dvaara') is used metaphorically in the Abhidhamma to denote the media through which the mind interacts with the objective world. … Six doors of cognition are recognized: the six sense doors by which the citta and cetasikas go out to meet the object and by which objects enter into range of the citta and cetasikas." [2/. Doors for sense-door processes] "Five of the doors are material phenomena ('ruupa'), namely, the sensitive matter ('pasaadaruupa') in each of the five sense organs. Each of these serves as a door by which the citta and cetasikas occurring in a cognitive process gain access to their object, and by which the object becomes accessible to the cittas and cetasikas. "Eye-sensitivity is the door for the cittas belonging to an eye-door process, enabling them to cognize visible forms through the eye. The same holds for the other sensitivities of the sense organs in relation to their respective processes and objects." [3/. Door for mind-door process] "Unlike the first five doors, the mind door ('manodvaara') is not material but mental ('naama'), namely, the bhavanga consciousness. When an object is to be cognized by a mind-door process, the cittas belonging to that process gain access to the object solely through the mind door, **without immediate dependence on any material sense faculty**." --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Howard & Kom, > here are a couple of comments from 'A Comprehensive Manual Of > Abhidhamma': > > p.130 'The life continuum is called the mind door': Unlike the first > five doors, the mind door (manodvara) is not material but mental (nama), > namely, the bhavanga consciousness. When an object is to be cognized by > a mind-door process, the cittas belonging to that process gain access to > the object solely through the mind door, without immediate dependence on > any material sense faculty. > > Different commentaries express contrary opinions about the precise > denotation of the mind door. The 'Vibhavini-Tika' states that the > bhavanga citta immediately preceeding the mind-door adverting > consciousness, i.e. the arrest bhavanga (bhavanga-upacheda), is the mind > door. Other Abhidhamma commentaries identify the mind door as the > bhavanga citta together with the mind-door adverting. However, Ledi > Sayadaw and the commentary to the 'Vibhanga' both state that the entire > bhavanga without distinction is the mind door. Acariya Anuruddha did not > make any specifications but simply stated that the bhavanga is called > the mind door. > > p. 152: The six types of cognitive processes are conveniently divided > into two groups--the five-door process (pancadvaravithi), which includes > the five processes occuring at each of the physical sense doors; and the > mind-door process (manodvaravithi), which comprises all processes that > occur solely at the mind door. Since the bhavanga is also the channel > from which the five-door processes emerge, the latter are sometimes > called mixed door processes (missaka-dvaravithi) as they involve both > the mind door and a physical sense door. The processes that occur solely > at the mind door are then called bare mind-door processes > (suddha-manodvaravitthi) since they emerge from the bhavanga alone > without the instrumentality of a physical sense door. > ------------------- > > L: In other words all six sense processes interrupt the flow of the > bhavanga and metaphorically arise in that channel but the physical sense > process is initiated at the physical sense doors while the mental > process is initiated at the bhavanga stream and hence called mind door. > > Another note: apparently what I was calling sanna in our discussion of > 'touching hot stove' was actually several citta functions in the citta > cognitive process, i.e. investigating, determining, and registration. > Not sure how sanna or the other cetasikas fit into this process. > > Larry 12641 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Apr 14, 2002 1:09am Subject: Re: Heart Base Hi TG, This is an interesting question, and I hope someone more knowledgeable than I has an answer. In the meantime, here are a few scattered references I managed to locate. Ajahn Brams has an mp3 talk on "Buddhism and Science" in which he quotes an instance of a person with no discernible brain achieving university level results. I have never downloaded this talk, and it is not in text form, but was mentioned on another list in a discussion about anencephalic babies (born with no brain). http://www.dhammaloka.org.au/audio.html Dict. meaning: "hadaya-vatthu: 'heart as physical base' of mental life. The heart, according to the commentaries as well as to the general Buddhist tradition, forms the physical base (vatthu) of consciousness In the canonical texts, however, even in the Abhidhamma Pitaka, no such base is ever localized, a fact which seems to have first been discovered by Shwe Zan Aung (Compendium of Philosophy, pp. 277ff.). In the Patth. we find repeatedly only the passage: "That material thing based on which mind-element and mind-consciousness element function" (yam rúpam nissáya manodhátu ca mano-viññána-dhátu ca vattanti, tam rúpam)." http://www.budsas.org/ebud/bud-dict/dic3_h.htm "The Mind-base is ordinarily referred to as heart-base (hadaya- vatthu). The Mind-base is clearly stated in the Vibhanga, the second treatise of the Abhidhamma, to be non-material, see the couplet section of Interrogation and Analysis of the Bases (para 171, section 2.)" http://www.palikanon.com/english/intro-abhidhamma/chapter_ii.htm metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., TGrand458@a... wrote: > I have a question for this group. As I understand it, Abhidhamma claims that > the physical heart is the base for mind consciousness. (Not the brain.) > Does anyone have an explanation for what appears to be a gross error on the > part of the Abhidhamma compilers? > > Thanks for whatever insights you might have. > > TG 12642 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Apr 14, 2002 1:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Coming Together of Conditions Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - > > We also need to keep in mind that the knowledge being developed by insight > > is > > knowledge of individual dhammas, not of the whole mass of dhammas > > collectively. > > So when we talk about the conditioned nature of dhammas being seen, we > > refer > > in fact to conditionality as a quality of an individual dhamma that is the > > object of insight, and likewise with the 3 characteristics. > > > ----------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Conditionality is a relation, Jon, not a property. Dhammas are > conditionally arisen. This cannot be seen by staring at individual dhammas. > ---------------------------------------------------- Thanks for this, Howard. I think I can see where some confusion may have crept in. 'Conditionality' can indeed be used to describe a particular relation. However, it can also be used to describe the quality of being formed or conditioned, in the sense of 'sankhara/sankhata'. (See passage from Buddhist Dictionary pasted below.) One of the meanings of 'sankhara dhamma' is dhammas that are formed or conditioned. And the term 'sankhata' has a similar meaning, usually I think used in apposition to the term 'asankhata' as an epithet for nibbana. It is in this sense of 'conditionality' that I said in my earlier post: > when we talk about the conditioned nature of dhammas being seen, we refer > in fact to conditionality as a quality of an individual dhamma that is the > object of insight I don’t know if you would find this proposition easier to accept in the light of these comments. [As for 'staring at dhammas', I'm pleased to see I've had a promotion from being a mere intellectualiser, then ;-)). But I must say I'm puzzled at your choice of phrase here, Howard -- I thought 'staring at dhammas' was what FSM was all about, no? ;-)) ]. Jon Nyanatiloka, 'Buddhist Dictionary' (Buddhist Publication Society, Kandy) [The **emphasis** is mine] Sankhaara "This term has, according to its context, different shades of meaning, which should be carefully distinguished. "(I) To its most frequent usages (see following 1-4) the general term 'formation' may be applied, with the qualifications required by the context. This term may refer either to the act of 'forming or to **the passive state of 'having been formed'** or to both. … "4. It occurs further in the sense of **anything formed (sankhata) and conditioned**, and includes all things whatever in the world, all phenomena of existence. This meaning applies, e.g. to the well-known passage, "All formations are impermanent... subject to suffering" (sabbe sankhaara aniccaa ... dukkhaa)." Sankhata "The 'formed', i.e. anything **originated or conditioned**, comprises all phenomena of existence." Asankhata "The 'Unformed, Unoriginated, Unconditioned' is a name for Nibbána, the **beyond of all becoming and conditionality**." 12643 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Apr 14, 2002 1:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Question of Reference Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, all - > Nina, Sarah, Jon, Robert K and others believe that Abhidhamma Pitaka > was, obviously with the exception of works like the Kathavatthu, created by > the Buddha. I would be very interested in seeing two categories of things: > (1) References to suttas in the Abhidhamma Pitaka, and (2) References to > parts of the Abhidhamma Pitaka in the Sutta Pitaka. Are these to be found, > and, if so, where? > > With metta, > Howard There are numerous cross-references in the Abhidhamma pitaka to specific passages in the Suttanta pitaka, but not the other way around (as far as I know). However, I would not be too hasty to jump to any 'obvious' conclusion from this. As discussed in previous posts, the suttas themselves include a number of 'abhidhamma' references (i.e., teachings given in terms of paramattha dhammas rather than the more usual conventional language). These references were what was judged appropriate and sufficient for the particular audience at the time. There would have been no point in cross-referring to another body of teachings. In general terms, the abhidhamma pitaka expounds on and amplifies the material contained in the suttas and not vice versa, so you would not expect to find in the suttas elaboration on the abhidhamma. The suttas were delivered to individuals and were tailored to the circumstances of that particular occasion, whereas the abhidhamma was given as a complete body of teaching, more like a source of reference (as far as the human plane is concerned). Just 1 or 2 random thoughts. Jon 12644 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Apr 14, 2002 2:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] 5 aggss is dukkha, 5 aggs of clinging more dukkha Frank You make some good points here. --- frank kuan wrote: > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > ... The Buddha, while alive, "had" all five > > khandhas, but the Buddha was > > beyond suffering. So it cannot be the khandhas per > > se, that are dukkha, but > > the five khandhas affected by clinging. That's as I > > see it. > > > I think it really comes down to how suffering is > defined. If suffering includes painful feeling, which > enlightened beings continue to experience, then I > think it's fair to say that before parinibbana, the > Buddha still experienced some suffering from 5 mere > aggregates. > If suffering only means extraneous and unecessary > MENTAL suffering created due to failure to correctly > perceive reality, and does not include raw physical > pain, then I would agree with Howard's statement, > which does seem to be the popular view among Buddhists > and canonical support, i.e. 3rd noble truth. > If cessation of suffering is seen from a broader > scope, i.e. the end of infinite cycle of rebirth into > samsara, then even physical pain is just a trifling > problem and it is fair to say there is cessation of > dukkha, with physical pain being negligible compared > to the infinite mental and physical pain from cyclic > existence. > > The objection I have with the commonly accepted > definition of cessation of dukkha is that it gives the > impression that enlightened people feel no physical > pain, and walk around with a sublime smile on their > face all the time. > > -fk I would just like to add something on khandhas vs. upadhana-khandhas. Upadana-khandhas are often equated with the khandhas of the arahant. I believe this is not quite correct. As far as I understand the texts (and speaking from memory), the upadana-khandhas are those khandhas that are 'subject to clinging'. Now, while it's true that an arahant has no more clinging, his khandhas (or at least some of them) can be the object of clinging -- the clinging of another, of course, not of the arahant himself. The only khandhas that are not capable of being the object of clinging are those associated with nibbana, namely, the lokuttara citta and the factors of the Noble Eightfold Path. This is because nibbana and lokuttara citta are beyond the comprehension of one who has not yet attained the first stage of enlightenment. (But there could of course be clinging to a *concept of* nibbana/lokuttara citta). Thanks for your thoughtful comments. Jon 12645 From: Date: Sun Apr 14, 2002 5:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Coming Together of Conditions Hi, Jon - My point is the following: All the dhammas we are mindful of are conditioned dhammas. How do we *see* their being conditioned by examining them? I say that we do *not* see their being conditioned by examining them individually but rather by seeing their arising dependently, which takes one *beyond* looking at individual dhammas. With metta, Howard In a message dated 4/14/02 4:49:05 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > > Howard > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, Jon - > > > We also need to keep in mind that the knowledge being developed by > insight > > > is > > > knowledge of individual dhammas, not of the whole mass of dhammas > > > collectively. > > > So when we talk about the conditioned nature of dhammas being seen, we > > > refer > > > in fact to conditionality as a quality of an individual dhamma that is > the > > > object of insight, and likewise with the 3 characteristics. > > > > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Conditionality is a relation, Jon, not a property. Dhammas are > > conditionally arisen. This cannot be seen by staring at individual > dhammas. > > ---------------------------------------------------- > > Thanks for this, Howard. I think I can see where some confusion may have > crept > in. > > 'Conditionality' can indeed be used to describe a particular relation. > However, it can also be used to describe the quality of being formed or > conditioned, in the sense of 'sankhara/sankhata'. (See passage from > Buddhist > Dictionary pasted below.) > > One of the meanings of 'sankhara dhamma' is dhammas that are formed or > conditioned. And the term 'sankhata' has a similar meaning, usually I > think > used in apposition to the term 'asankhata' as an epithet for nibbana. > > It is in this sense of 'conditionality' that I said in my earlier post: > > when we talk about the conditioned nature of dhammas being seen, we refer > > in fact to conditionality as a quality of an individual dhamma that is > the > > object of insight > > I don’t know if you would find this proposition easier to accept in the > light > of these comments. > > [As for 'staring at dhammas', I'm pleased to see I've had a promotion from > being a mere intellectualiser, then ;-)). But I must say I'm puzzled at > your > choice of phrase here, Howard -- I thought 'staring at dhammas' was what > FSM > was all about, no? ;-)) ]. > > Jon > > Nyanatiloka, 'Buddhist Dictionary' (Buddhist Publication Society, Kandy) > [The **emphasis** is mine] > > Sankhaara > "This term has, according to its context, different shades of meaning, > which > should be carefully distinguished. > "(I) To its most frequent usages (see following 1-4) the general term > 'formation' may be applied, with the qualifications required by the > context. > This term may refer either to the act of 'forming or to **the passive state > of > 'having been formed'** or to both. > … > "4. It occurs further in the sense of **anything formed (sankhata) and > conditioned**, and includes all things whatever in the world, all phenomena > of > existence. > This meaning applies, e.g. to the well-known passage, "All formations are > impermanent... subject to suffering" (sabbe sankhaara aniccaa ... > dukkhaa)." > > Sankhata > "The 'formed', i.e. anything **originated or conditioned**, comprises all > phenomena of existence." > > Asankhata > "The 'Unformed, Unoriginated, Unconditioned' is a name for Nibbána, the > **beyond of all becoming and conditionality**." > > /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) 12646 From: Date: Sun Apr 14, 2002 6:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Question of Reference Hi, Jon - In a message dated 4/14/02 4:53:15 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > > Howard > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, all - > > Nina, Sarah, Jon, Robert K and others believe that Abhidhamma > Pitaka > > was, obviously with the exception of works like the Kathavatthu, created > by > > the Buddha. I would be very interested in seeing two categories of > things: > > (1) References to suttas in the Abhidhamma Pitaka, and (2) References to > > parts of the Abhidhamma Pitaka in the Sutta Pitaka. Are these to be > found, > > and, if so, where? > > > > With metta, > > Howard > > There are numerous cross-references in the Abhidhamma pitaka to specific > passages in the Suttanta pitaka, but not the other way around (as far as I > know). However, I would not be too hasty to jump to any 'obvious' > conclusion > from this. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: I wouldn't want to be hasty either. And I'm not prepared by any means to settle on an absolute conclusion. But I *would* expect to see, among the enormous number of suttas, *some* references to the Abhidhamma Pitaka if that were created by the Buddha. I did find Stigan's mention of a reference to the Abhidhamma in the Vinaya to be quite interesting. Do you (or does anyone here) know the vintage of that Vinaya reference? ------------------------------------------------- > > As discussed in previous posts, the suttas themselves include a number of > 'abhidhamma' references (i.e., teachings given in terms of paramattha > dhammas > rather than the more usual conventional language). These references were > what > was judged appropriate and sufficient for the particular audience at the > time. > There would have been no point in cross-referring to another body of > teachings. > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, the foregoing expresses a view, a view which already presupposes the very status of the Abhidhamma Pitaka that is being discussed. If the suttas are actually what the Buddha taught, and the Abhidhamma Pitaka is a later development which expands on the detail of the content of the suttas, then it is a kind of "back reference" to call content of the suttas Abhidhammic. In any case, the Buddha taught the Dhamma in the suttas, which is quite good enough. Also, by "Abhidhamma references" in the suttas, I don't mean content similar to content to be found in the Abhidhamma Pitaka. I mean references in the suttas to *that basket* called the Abhidhamma Pitaka, or to well definable parts of that basket, especially the two main works of analysis and synthesis. -------------------------------------------------------------- > > In general terms, the abhidhamma pitaka expounds on and amplifies the > material > contained in the suttas and not vice versa, so you would not expect to find > in > the suttas elaboration on the abhidhamma. > ------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm not looking for elaboration, merely references - such as " Bhikkhus, finer detail about the influence of dhammas on dhammas can be found in the subtle Patthana teachings which I have given. My lieutenant, Sariputta, will speak of this to those of you for whom this will be useful." ------------------------------------------------------------- > > The suttas were delivered to individuals and were tailored to the > circumstances > of that particular occasion, whereas the abhidhamma was given as a complete > body of teaching, more like a source of reference (as far as the human > plane is > concerned). > > Just 1 or 2 random thoughts. > > Jon > > ========================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 12647 From: Date: Sun Apr 14, 2002 6:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Heart Base Hi Christine Thanks for all the information on the heart base. I will take a look at those sources. I was under the impression that the heart base was actually referred to in the Abhidhamma Pitaka but apparantly I'm wrong. I've only read the Vibhanga all the way through directly and I wasn't particularly looking for it. Perhaps it is in the commentaries to Dhammasanghini or Vibhanga. I'm pretty sure it does show up in the Visuddhimagga and Abhidhammattha Sangaha. In the latter two cases, I doubt they would have thrown it in unless they had something "canonical" to draw from. Thanks again. TG 12648 From: Date: Sun Apr 14, 2002 7:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A Question of Reference Hi Howard, just a thought on tipitaka references. There was no tipitaka during the Buddha's life; there probably was a rudimentary vinaya code but no sutta pitaka, so any references to 'tipitaka' had to be added to what was _remembered_. Larry 12649 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Sun Apr 14, 2002 7:45pm Subject: Re: Heart Base Dear TG, These are some old posts that might have something relevant: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5395 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5410 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5470 best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., TGrand458@a... wrote: > I have a question for this group. As I understand it, Abhidhamma claims that > the physical heart is the base for mind consciousness. (Not the brain.) > Does anyone have an explanation for what appears to be a gross error on the > part of the Abhidhamma compilers? > > Thanks for whatever insights you might have. > > TG > > > 12650 From: Ven. Dr. Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Sun Apr 14, 2002 0:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Heart Base http://www.ubakhin.com/ledi/MANUAL08.html 12651 From: Date: Sun Apr 14, 2002 6:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A Question of Reference Hi, Larry - In a message dated 4/14/02 10:08:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > > Hi Howard, just a thought on tipitaka references. There was no tipitaka > during the Buddha's life; there probably was a rudimentary vinaya code > but no sutta pitaka, so any references to 'tipitaka' had to be added to > what was _remembered_. > > Larry > > ======================== Yes, you're right. No Tipitaka. However, wouldn't there be some references by him, recorded in the suttas, to "more precise" or "more detailed" teaching? If the Abhidhamma teachings were created by the Buddha during his lifetime, would there not have been some mention of them in some of the teachings recorded in the suttas? Moreover, though no Tipitaka, per se, existed during the Buddha's lifetime, surely the sutta teachings of the Buddha were told and retold by Bhikkhus during the 45 years of the Buddha's teaching his Dhamma, and they would have had names to refer to them by. Likewise, the Abhidhammic teachings, supposedly created by the Buddha and later recorded in the Abhidhamma Pitaka would have had to have had names to refer to and for memorization purposes. The point is that it just doesn't seem to make sense that the Abhidhamma was created by the Buddha, himself. Where is the evidence? 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) 12652 From: Date: Sun Apr 14, 2002 7:46pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A Question of Reference Hi Howard A few more quotes where the word "Abhidhamma" occur's in the Sutta's "Here friend Sariputta,two bhikkhus engage in a talk on the Abhidhamma and they question each other,and being questioned by the other answers without foundering,and their talk rolls on in accordance with the Dhamma.:Mahagosinga sutta,32 Majjhima Nikaya. "While you are training in concord, with mutual appreciation,without disputing,two bhikkhus might differ about the Abhidhamma: Kinti Sutta 103 Majjhima Nikaya "A forest dwelling bhikkhu should apply himself to the Abhidhamma and the Abhivinaya". Gulissani Sutta,69 Majjhima Nikaya With Metta Stigan 12653 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Apr 15, 2002 6:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Directed attention to dhammas (Ken H., Eric, Howard) Hi Rob Ep > I agree that the ideal of the jhanas as part of Right Concentration is > to 'burn up' the defilements through the meditative power of the jhanas. I also agree that any form of suppression is not really 'Right Concentration'. In fact I don't think I said that it was, but I can understand how it might seem like I was saying this. If you look at the quote from me that you have copied above, you will not see any reference to 'suppression' being a part of 'Right Concentration' k: Oops I sorry to have misinterpret you. "Etymology of Jhana > The great Buddhist commentator Buddhaghosa traces the Pali word "jhana" > (Skt. dhyana) to two verbal forms. One, the etymologically correct derivation,> is the verb jhayati, meaning to think or meditate; the other is a more playful derivation, intended to illuminate its function rather than its verbal source, from the verb jhapeti meaning to burn up. He explains: "It burns up opposing states, thus it is jhana" (Vin.A. i, 116), the purport being that jhana "burns up" or destroys the mental defilements preventing the developing the development of serenity and insight." k: hmm I not comfortable with the word "burn up". Was it the real intention of this word jhana. Could mental defilement be burn up?. These are just my personal doubts. Anywhere, I am not an expert on this, so I could not contribute fruitfully this issue. Kind regards Ken O 12654 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Apr 15, 2002 6:40am Subject: RE: [dsg] ADL ch 1 (3) (Rupa) Hi Kom --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Howard, > > I think I will add some random information here, not > addressing your concern (as Robert may have done that). > > 1) I think it is important to clearly separate concept from > realities from the standpoint that I believe that only > realities can be objects of satipatthana. I can keep > thinking by conventional observation (non-satipathana) that > "feeling is impermanent". Although this thinking of > conceptual thought may be kusala, it doesn't ultimately lead > to nibbana until there is sati and panna rising to realize > the actual chararacteristics of feeling (and eventually, the > impermanence of feeling). > From the detailed explanation of the different suttas given > by the abhiddhamma, separating the two is one of the most > essential fundamental first step because of the reason > above. A person who doesn't understand the separation > between the two doesn't usually understand why someone would > say that there is no person and there is no being (with all > the caveats that Robert has given). The person also cannot > develop satipatthana as they do not know what is/what isn't > satipatthana (as one cannot develop jhana if one doesn't > know the actual differences between kusala and akusala). k: Could u kindly provide commentaries that support that only reality is the object of satipatthana. Kind regards Ken O 12655 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Apr 15, 2002 6:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Coming Together of Conditions Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - > > My point is the following: All the dhammas we are mindful of are > conditioned dhammas. How do we *see* their being conditioned by examining > them? I say that we do *not* see their being conditioned by examining them > individually but rather by seeing their arising dependently, which takes one > *beyond* looking at individual dhammas. > > With metta, > Howard Thanks for this concise summary of your thoughts on this area. Yes, I do understand what you have been saying. I'm just not sure why you feel that the conditioned nature of a dhamma cannot be seen by the panna that has the dhamma as its object. Jon 12656 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Apr 15, 2002 6:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Heart Base TG Welcome to the list from me, and thanks for bringing up this interesting topic. --- TGrand458@a... wrote: > I have a question for this group. As I understand it, Abhidhamma claims that > > the physical heart is the base for mind consciousness. (Not the brain.) > Does anyone have an explanation for what appears to be a gross error on the > part of the Abhidhamma compilers? > > Thanks for whatever insights you might have. No insights here, but just a question and a comment. You suggest that the brain is the obvious candidate for the base of mind consciousness. I would be interested to know what you base this on -- general scientific knowledge or personal observation/experience? A point to consider along the way. 'Mind consciousness' must include not only 'brain activity' of the thinking type but also the experience of the data that appears at the various sense doors. So, for example, it includes the experiencing of the hardness that appears at the soles of the feet as one walks across the floor. Can we say that the brain is a more likely base for this moment of consciousness than, say, the heart? Jon 12657 From: Date: Mon Apr 15, 2002 2:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Question of Reference Hi, Stigan - In a message dated 4/15/02 2:52:16 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Bodhi2500@a... writes: > Hi Howard > A few more quotes where the word "Abhidhamma" occur's in > the > Sutta's > > "Here friend Sariputta,two bhikkhus engage in a talk on the Abhidhamma and > they question each other,and being questioned by the other answers without > foundering,and their talk rolls on in accordance with the > Dhamma.:Mahagosinga > sutta,32 Majjhima Nikaya. > > "While you are training in concord, with mutual appreciation,without > disputing,two bhikkhus might differ about the Abhidhamma: Kinti Sutta 103 > Majjhima Nikaya > > "A forest dwelling bhikkhu should apply himself to the Abhidhamma and the > Abhivinaya". Gulissani Sutta,69 Majjhima Nikaya > > With Metta > Stigan > > ========================== Once again you have done something marvelous! I looked for these suttas on ATI, and not finding them there I went directly to my copy of "The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha" by Bhikkus ~Nanamoli and Bodhi. All three of your references are there and exactly as you describe them. Moreover, I note two matters of interest: 1) The Mahagosinga and Gulissani Suttas both involve Sariputta in an important way, which is significant inasmuch as Sariputta is traditionally associated with the Abhidhamma, and 2) The Kinti Sutta's mention of Abhidhamma immediately follows, and is alleged to refer to, the LIST (!) of 37 requisites for enlightenment detailed in the previous paragraph. I find this to be direct evidence that Abhidhamma is referred to in the suttas, associated there with Sariputta, and involving detailed lists. This certainly suggests that, at the very least, the seeds of what was to become the Abhidhamma Pitaka were in place during the lifetime of the Buddha. Perhaps much more was already in place. In any case, what you have provided here, Stigan, is certainly important food for thought. With metta, Howard P.S. To Sarah, Jon, and Stigan: There has been some discussion of Abhidhamma, and its origins, on another list. I wish to request that I combine a few of the relevant DSG posts on this, including the body of this current post of mine, into a single post which I will send to that other list. I will remove names of posters other than mine if it is wished. Would this be okay? /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) 12658 From: Sarah Date: Mon Apr 15, 2002 7:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Question of Reference Dear Howard and All, --- upasaka@a... wrote: >........ But I *would* expect to see, among > the > enormous number of suttas, *some* references to the Abhidhamma Pitaka if > that > were created by the Buddha. ========================= I’ve been adding notes here when I’ve had time for the last 2 or 3 days (some of which are also for the benefit of others newer to dsg, so please be patient;-)). In the meantime, I’ve appreciated seeing other comments and sutta references by Stigan. Most my comments in this post will be from the Atthasalini which has a very useful introductory discourse on just the concerns and issues raised by Howard. We read in this discourse that: “The textual order of the Abhidhamma originated with Sariputta; the numerical series in the Great Book was also determined by him. In this way the elder, without spoiling the unique doctrine, laid down the numerical series in order to make it easy to learn, remember, study and teach the Law. Such being the case, was the elder the very first to understand the Abhidhamma? Nay, it was the supreme Buddha who first understood the Abhidhamma....” ***** The Great Book here refers to the Pattana, the last Abhidhamma text. We read in the Atthasalini how “Rays of six colours -indigo, golden, red, white, tawny, and dazzling - issued from the Teacher’s body, as he was contemplating the subtle and abstruse Law by his omniscience which had found such opportunity” when he “began to contemplate the twenty-four universal causal relations of condition, of presentation, and so on....” ***** Often in the suttas too, we read many references to the Buddha’s Teachings as explained by his key disciples such as in the Nakulipita Sutta (recently discussed on dsg) where the words were elaborated by Sariputta. In the Atthasalini, it gives the following example from DN: “ ‘Bhikkhus, learned is Mahakaccana, profoundly wise is Mahakaccana. If you had asked me the same question, I would have answered exactly as he has done.’ Thus since the time when the Teacher gave his approval, the whole suttanta became the word of the Buddha. And it is the same with the suttas expounded by Ananda and others.” ***** Some time ago, in the Series on the Bahiranidana (commentary to the Vinaya), in posts: 9464, 9495, 9673, 9810, 9961,10143, 10310, (under Vinaya - commentary to) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts I tried to show how Buddhagosa traced the Abhidhamma to the 1st Council with many references from the Vinaya itself. He then traced the history of the dhamma-vinaya to the 3 councils and finally to the Vinaya recital in Sri lanka under Mahinda, showing that the Bhikkhus “again rehearsed the entire Dhamma and the Vinaya...even in the same manner as it was rehearsed by the elder Mahakassapa” (Smp, commentary to Vinaya, 38) ***** I mentioned how at the time of the 1st council, the Tipitaka (as we know it) was referred to as Dhamma-Vinaya. I believe in suttas such as the Mahaparinibbana Sutta, the Buddha instructed the bhikkhus to take the ‘dhamma-vinaya’ as their Teacher after he passed away. In the series, I also wrote about how the Khudakka Nikaya included in the recital includes the Abhidhamma texts. In the Atthasalini, we read: “Which is the Khuddaka Nikaya? the whole of the Vinaya-Pitaka, Abhidhamma-Pitaka, and the fifteen divisions.....beginning with Khuddakapatha, Dhammapada, all the remaining words of the Buddha, excluding the four Nikayas....” In both the Bahiranidana and the Atthasalini, detail is given of the explanation in detail of how the 84,000 units of dhamma-vinaya text is formed and this includes how: “Thus as rehearsed at the council, the Abhidhamma is Pitaka by Pitaka classification, Khuddaka-Nikaya by Nikaya classification, Veyyakarana by part classification and constitutes two or three thousand untis of text by the classification of textual units” and “In the Abhidhamma each trinal or dual classification, as well as each clasification of conscious intervals, forms one unit of text.” ***** Reference is also made to to these 84,000 units of dhamma in the Vinaya itself. and as I also mentioned, there are also references to the Abhidhamma in the 1st council in the abhidhamma texts themselves(Vibhanga)and in texts of Mahayana schools . Furthermore, from the Atthasalini, we read about references to the Abhidhamma in the Vianaya and Suttanta: “for it has been said by the Buddha (Vin, 1V,344): “If without any intention of reviling the Vinaya one were to instigate another, saying, Pray study the Suttas or Gathas or Abhidhamma first and afterwards you will learn the Vinaya - there is no offence in him,” (Again, in the Bhikkhuni Vibhanga Vin,1V,344) “Abhikkhuni is guilty of a minor offence) if she questions on the Abhidhamma or Vinaya after getting permission (to question) on the Suttanta, or on the Suttanta or Vinaya after getting permission (to question) on the Abhidhamma, or on the suttanta or Abhidhamma after getting permission (to question) on the Vinaya.”...... The Atthasalini continues: “The Mahagosinga sutta (MN 1, 218) is even stronger authority (to show that the Abhidhamma is the Buddha’s word). for therein when Sariputta, the Generaliisimo of the law, approached the Teacer to inform him of the reciprocal questions and answers that took place between Mahamoggallana and himself, and told how the former had answered (the master said) ‘Brother Sariputta, in the religion the talk of two bhikkhus on the Abhidhamma, each asking and answering the other without faltering, is in accord with the Dhamma. Now such a bhikkhu, brother Sariputta, might enhance the beauty of the Gosinga Sala Forest. The Teacher, far from saying that bhikkus, who knew Abhidhamma, were outside his religion, lifted his drum-like neck and filling (with breath) his mouth, fraught as the full-moon with blessings, emitted his godlike voice,congratulating Moggallana thus: ‘Well done, well done, Sariputta! One should answer rightly as Moggallana has done; Moggallana is indeed a preacher of the dhamma.’ “ ***** We read further in the Atthasalini that “tradition has it that those bhikkhus only who know Abhidhamma are true preachers of the Dhamma”..”He who prohibits (the teaching of ) abhidhamma gives a blow to the Wheel of the conqueror, denies omniscience, subverts the Teacher’s knowledge full of confidence, deceives the audience, obstructs the path of the Ariyas, manifests himself as advocating one of the eighteen causes of dissension in the Order, is capable of doing acts for which the doer is liable to be excommunicated, or admonished (see Vin11,7) or scorned (by the Order), and should be dismissed after the particular act of excommunication, admonition, or scorn, and reduced to living on scraps of food”. ***** The most controversial Abhidhamma text of all is the Kathavatthu. In the Atthasalini we read that even the Kathavatthu was envisaged by the Buddha himself. We read “Thus in teaching the seven books, when he came to the Kathavatthu the Buddha laid down the table of contents in the way mentioned above.. In doing so he foresaw that 218 years after his death, Tissa, Moggsali’s son, seated in the midst of 1000 bhikkhus, would elaborate the Kathavatthu as is stated above. And Tisa, Moggali’s son, expounded the book not by his own knowledge but according to the table of contents laid down, as well as by the method given, by the teacher. hence the entire book became the word of the Buddha. thus the Abhidhamma consists of seven books inclusive of the Kathavatthu.” ***** We may wonder why the Buddha taught the Abhidhamma in the Tavatimsa realm after contemplating it for 7 days. In the Atthasalini it explains how Ananda, “a disciple of such surpassing mindfulness, intellgence and fortitude would not be able to finish learning in a thousand years the sermons preached by the Teacher in three months” as it was so “infinite and immeasurable” . There are also references to suttas which act as introductions to the Abhidhamma, but this post has become long enough, so I’d better stop but, I’d like to at least recommend (in addition to the Atthasalini)