14400 From: <> Date: Thu Jul 18, 2002 9:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 16 (2) Hi Frank and Kom, I wonder how these terms relate to a neither pleasant nor painful feeling. Does that kind of feeling have a different origin, satisfaction, and peril? 'Escape' seems a little odd in this case as well. Any comments? Larry "Being impinged on by a feeling that is neither painful nor pleasant, he does not comprehend the origin nor the going down nor the satisfaction nor the peril of that feeling nor the escape from it as it really is; a tendency to ignorance is latent in him..." 14401 From: <> Date: Thu Jul 18, 2002 10:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'pretty much given up' ????? Hi Sarah, I guess I should have said *I* have given up on understanding memory; or perhaps, this group that is *me* has given up, instead of *you guys* have given up on understanding memory as something other or more than sanna. I guess my point was that I didn't think memories and accumulations (ayuhana) was the same thing. My further point was that everyone (*you guys*) seems to be locked-in to sanna as the alpha and omega of memory. There's got to be more to it than "sanna marks for memory." But whatever more there is isn't in abhidhamma; so all we can do is speculate, and in the end that's pretty unsatisfactory. So I gave up. But 'giving up' being an event in a continuous flow of events, it later occured to me that recognizing and remembering are probably distinct, complex processes. Furthermore, we all probably have perfect memories but there is considerable variability in our ability to remember. This no doubt is due to hindrances to clear seeing. Would there, by any chance, be a list of such hindrances? Larry 14402 From: frank kuan Date: Thu Jul 18, 2002 10:40am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 16 (2) --- <> wrote: > Hi Frank and Kom, I wonder how these terms relate to > a neither pleasant > nor painful feeling. Does that kind of feeling have > a different origin, > satisfaction, and peril? 'Escape' seems a little odd > in this case as > well. Any comments? > There's worldly neutral feeling and unworldly neutral feeling (higher jhana only has pure equanimity, no physical pleasant feeling). The unworldly neutral feeling is dangerous and satisfying in the same way a pleasant worldly feeling is. Easy to cling to due to its pleasantness. -fk 14403 From: <> Date: Thu Jul 18, 2002 10:40am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 16 (1) Larry and Rob M Hi Nina, this interface between the sense door and the mind door (bhavanga citta) is what interests me. I had the idea that the sense door sent a representative of the rupa to the mind door where it was 'looked at' by 17 cittas in a row then dissoved. Your point that a rupa doesn't physically barge into the mind door and interrupt the bhavanga is well taken. I hadn't considered that the interruption is an internal matter between cittas. I'm still having trouble visualizing or imagining how citta cognizes rupa. While I have your eye, I wanted to ask you how long the objects in mind-door process last. For example, are there 7 different objects during the javana series? thanks for your help, Larry 14404 From: <> Date: Thu Jul 18, 2002 10:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 16 (1) Larry and Rob M Hi Howard, you asked: "How does one (anyone, including a Buddha) know a rupa that is not the object of a citta?" I don't know how a Buddha knows things, but everyone else uses inference, deduction, logic and other processes associated with reason. Without it, we couldn't even formulate the idea of phenomenalism. But I guess what we really want to know is how does a Buddha know dhammas. I would also acknowledge that a phenomenalist perspective has proven throughout the centuries to be an effective liberative technique. best wishes, Larry 14405 From: <> Date: Thu Jul 18, 2002 11:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 16 (2) H Frank, I'm having a lot of trouble seeing how a worldly neutral feeling is satisfying or dangerous. I guess I'm ignorant. Duh, who woulda thunk it? best wishes, Larry 14406 From: search Date: Thu Jul 18, 2002 4:21am Subject: Re : [dsg] Re: Refuge and Precepts Ruth wrote: > What is a sensei? "sensei" means "master". It is used when speaking of spiritual leaders. It is also used in martial arts, for "teachers" who have reached a high level. It is used as a title or as a sign of respect... or both. Best regards. Jean-François 14407 From: Sarah Date: Thu Jul 18, 2002 3:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "practice"/"practical"/"application" in Nya's Abhidhamma Studies.. Hi Jaran (& Christine), --- Jaran Jai-nhuknan wrote: > Hi all: > I am enjoying my souvenir from Sri Lanka: Many books form PBS. ... and I > have a quick question: ..... Glad to hear the books are being put to good use and to see you sharing them here;-) Yes, Chris, he also left Colombo airport loaded up with B.Bodhi’s translations and other books like this one.... ..... > I am reading this "Abhidhamma Studies" Preface and Chapter one. I think > it's a good book. Both Bhikhu Bodhi and Ven. Nyanaponika Thera clearly > differentiate Samatha and Vipassana meditation. One question I have is > the words like "practice","practical" and "application" (in Concluding > Remarks pp 16-17), do they belong there? > > In my opinion, they do if the word 'practice' and practical' mean > observe or being aware of dhamma in daily life, and 'application' means > make dhamma relevant to daily life. But I am not sure in what context he > means. > > What do you all think? ..... Wow, I think Chris is a marvel of efficiency;-).....hope to get some tips... Jaran, I think that in this context as I understand it, he’s merely discussing the value of abhidhamma studies, provided it does not become a ‘rigid system of lifeless concepts’. In other words, he’s not attempting to discuss what ‘practice’ or ‘application’ is here (or he could have used Pali terms like vipassana, bhavana, patipada, patipatti and so on). He’s merely cautioning that theoretical and intellectual study are not the same as direct understanding and practice. I particularly like the following quoted paragraph which is similar to one or two themes we’ve been discussing recently on DSG: ***** > The study of the Abhidhamma should therefore not be allowed > to degenerate into a mere collecting, counting, and arranging of such > conceptual labels. This would make of Abhidhamma study - though, of > course, not of the Abhidhamma itself - just one more among the many > intellectual "playthings" that serve as an escape from facing > reality, or as a "respectable excuse" with which to evade the hard > inner work needed for liberation. A merely abstract and conceptual > approach to the Abhidhamma may also lead to that kind of intellectual > pride that often goes together with specialized knowledge. ***** As for the question of how ‘practice’ should be understood and the role of abhidhamma in practice, these are good areas for consideration and I hope you will say more and add the Pali terms (now you have access to Pali, Thai and English Tipitaka;-)) and encourage others to discuss further while I’m away. Sarah ===== 14408 From: Sarah Date: Thu Jul 18, 2002 4:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Frankfood Hi Frank (Nina & All), --- frank kuan wrote: > > My reason for practicing astanga is for the benefits > it brings to physical health (from a holistic > perspective, not just western notion of physical > health) health to complement the mental culture path > from Buddhism. ..... I followed your discussions with interest and find it easy to ‘relate’ to these comments and to‘Frankfood’. I’ve been looking out some references for your consideration, which I’ll add without comments under a few headings. As usual,I was pulling out texts looking for one in particular which I could ‘visualize’ on a page but couldn’t find . It was stressing the importance of the state of mind and giving up of attachment when one eats less. It was very relevant for me because when I eat less, more healthily or do more yoga or other exercise, it’s almost entirely prompted by attachment rather than by ‘giving up of attachment’;-) Anyway, hope you like these ones: ***** 1.Heat born of Kamma --------------------------- “For when there is no substance such as boiled rice in the stomach, that heat arises and seizes the stomach-walls and causes the being to cry out thus, “I am hungry; give me food.” When he has eaten, the heat releases the stomach-walls and seizes the substance. Then the person is quieted in mind. For as a hungry demon seizes him who enters the shade of the tree, binds him with spirit-chains and rejoicing in his own abode, comes when hungry and bites him on the head, so that the person cies out til....” Atthasalini, Derived material Qualities, p431 (PTS) ***** 2. Meal Intoxication ----------------------- “bhattasammada (meal intoxication), bhuttaavissa (in one who has eaten)=bhuttavato. Bhattamucchaa (giddiness due to food) is sickness due to food; for through much one comes to giddiness. Bhattakilamatho (distress due to food) is a distressed state due to food. Bhattapari.laaho (fever due to food) is discomfort due to food; for at that time the body hurts since its faculties are oppressed and it comes to a state of fever. Kaayadu.t.tulla.m (bodily inertia) is bodily unwieldiness due to food. Sammohavinodani2, class. of the Minor Bases, p235 (Masefield trans) ***** 3. Moderation -------------- “When a man is always mindful, Knowing moderation in the food he eats, His ailments then diminish: He ages slowly, guarding his life.” SN, Sagathavagga, A Bucket measure of Food, p.176 (BB trans) ***** “And how, bhikkhus, is a bhikkhu moderate in eating? Here, reflecting wisely, a bhikkhu takes food neither for amusement nor for intoxication nor for the sake of physical beauty and attractiveness, but only for support and maintenance of this body, for ending discomfort, and for assisting the holy life, considering: “Thus I shall terminate the old feeling and not arouse a new feeling, and I shall be healthy and blameless and live in comfort.” Just as a person anoints a wound only for the purpose of enabling it to heal......” SN, Salayatanavagga, Simile of the Chariot, p.1240 (Also see Vism,1<89f> for more detail) ***** 4.For assisting the life of Purity ------------------------------------ “..for the purpose of assisting the life of purity consisting in the whole dispensation and the life of purity consisting in the path. For while this (bhikkhu) is engaged in crossing the desert of existence by means of devotion to the three trainings depending on bodily strength whose necessary condition is the use of alms food, he makes use of it to asist the life of purity .....just as those seeking to cross a river use a raft...” Vism, 1 <92> ***** “Furthermore, seven things lead to the arising of the tranquillity (passaddhi) enlightenment factor: (1) use of good food, (2) use of good weather, (3)use of a pleasant posture, (4) keeping to the middle, (5) avoidance of persons who are physically violent, (6) cultivation of persons who are bodily tranquil, (7) being resloved thereon. (1) Tranquillity arises in one who eats mild, suitable food...........But this is not said with reference to one who, with a nature like that of a Great Man, can bear all kinds of weather and postures; but to one for whom some kinds of weather and postures are contrary, it arises when he avoids the contrary kinds of weather and postures and uses favourable ones.” Sammohavinodani, Classif. of the Foundations of Mindfulness, p347 (PTS) ***** 5 Different Needs --------------------- “Food: Sweet food suits one, sour food another. Climate: a cool climate suits one, a warm one another. So when he finds that by using certain food or by living in a certain climate he is comfortable, or his unconcentrated mind becomes concentrated, or his concentrated mind becomes more so, then that food or that climate is suitable. Any other food or climate is unsuitable. Postures: walking suits one; standing or sitting or lying down suits another. So he should try them, like the abode, for three days each, and then that posture is suitable.....” Vism 1V<40> ***** “Sammi~njite pasaarite (“In bending and stretching”): in the bending and stretching of the limbs. Herein “clear comprehension of benefit” is the choosing of the beneficial, by choosing between the beneficial and the non-beneficial, that would be caused by the bending or stretching of the hand or foot, and without doing the bending or stretching as the immediate consequence of the thought itself. Herein, in one who remains too long with hand or foot bent only or stretched only, feelings arise from moment to moment. he does not get one-pointedness of mind.....” Sammohavinodani2, Class. of the Jhanas,p84 (Masefield) ***** “But among crude and refined, sour and sweet, etc, the food which produces discomfort in one is unsuitable. But that which is received by hinting, etc and that which increases unprofitable states and decreases profitable states is quite unsuitable. The opposite kind is suitable. ‘Clear comprehension of suitability’ should be understood here as that.” Sammohavinodani 2, Class. of the Jhanas, p87 ***** 6.Contentedness ------------------- “Take the case, moreover, of the monk who acquires almsfood, be it coarse or choice. With this alone he sustains himself; he does not wish for any other, nor does he, even when acquiring same, make use of such. This is, with respect to almsfood, his contentedness as accords with its acquisition. On the other hand, if he has some affliction, he ends up, upon consuming almsfood that is either coarse, disagreeable by nature or disagreeable to one with disease, with some intense impediment in the form of ill-health;.......Thus, with respect to almsfood, his contentedness as accords with one’s strength....” Udana commentary,Meghiya chapter, p586 (Masefield trans) .......... “The ascetic Akitti searched for Kara leaves that were sufficient for only one meal a day, because he found that searching for food for two meals would not lead to the eradication of defilements. This is the perfection of patience, because his life was not involved with the urge to eat.” The Perfections by A.Sujin, ‘Morality’ ***** 7.Pride ------- “Pride of birth; pride of clan; pride of health; pride of youth........pride of form; pride of (bodily) perfection;......” Vibhanga, Analysis of Small Items, p452 (PTS) ***** “And as regards vanity of health (aarogyamada) and so on, the conceit that arises as intoxication thus: “I am healthy; the rest are unhealthy; ‘there is no sickness in me even for as long as it takes to milk a cow’ is called “vanity of health”. The conceit that arises as intoxication thus: “I am young; the person of other beings is like a tree growing on a cliff. But I am in the first stage (of life)’ is called “vanity of youth” (yobbanamada).........The conceit that arises as intoxication thus: ‘the bodies of the rest of beings are unshapely, misshapen, but mine is agreeable and pleasing’ is called “vanity of shape” (sa.n.thaanamada). The conceit that arises as intoxication thus: ‘The bodies of the rest of beings have many faults, but in my body there is not even the tip of a hair to be criticised’ is called “vanity of perfection” (paaripuurimada). Sammohavinodani2, Class. of Minor Bases, p223 (Masefield) ***** I hope there’s something here for everyone to consider....Of course, with regard to the last quote on conceit, when we consider ourselves less healthy, less youthful or less shapely/perfect than others, there's also mana (conceit) too;-) Sarah ===== 14409 From: goglerr Date: Thu Jul 18, 2002 6:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 16 (1) Larry and Rob M Hi Larry, Your post attracted my eyes. Kindly let me barge in. U said "I don't know how a Buddha knows things, but everyone else uses inference, deduction, logic and other processes associated with reason. Without it, we couldn't even formulate the idea of phenomenalism. But I guess what we really want to know is how does a Buddha know dhammas." I would to remind us that the Buddha is only a teacher, a guide, an instructor or the one who show us the way. He is not the one walk the path for us, not the one who liberate us but we, ourselves have to follow the instructions, with humbleness and wisdom, which has been laid down by Him and the great elders of the past, for our own liberation. We have to realize the dhamma for ourselves as the Buddha (s) has realized for himself. Inference, deduction, logic and other processes associated with reason are only one level on wisdom, but if we only stop here and not follow through, we are just only gaining some scholarly knowledge. So if we are wise, then we have to follow through, i.e. to know the dhamma for ourselves. Yes, we CAN directly know or experience them as the Buddha experienced them too. We can experience the different nature of mind and and body or rather the 5 aggregates. Then this becomes another level of wisdom, penatrative wisdom. As we experience them, we will come to know that they actually tally or go parallel with our scholarly Dhamma knowledge. And we still follow through, to know the nature of mind and body as constantly arising and passing away. And this too is another level of penatrative wisdom. And we carry on to follow through, deepening our wisdom, perceiving the anicca, dukkha and anatta through the arising and passing away of the nature of mind and body, until the arising of the ultimate wisdom, the total cessation of the mind and body. The question now is, how to develop these penatrative wisdom? I leave this to you, cos I think you know the `how'. G --- Larry wrote: > Hi Howard, you asked: > "How does one (anyone, including a Buddha) know a rupa that is not the > object of a citta?" > > I don't know how a Buddha knows things, but everyone else uses > inference, deduction, logic and other processes associated with reason. > Without it, we couldn't even formulate the idea of phenomenalism. But I > guess what we really want to know is how does a Buddha know dhammas. > > I would also acknowledge that a phenomenalist perspective has proven > throughout the centuries to be an effective liberative technique. > > best wishes, Larry 14410 From: frank kuan Date: Fri Jul 19, 2002 1:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 16 (2) Hi Larry, --- <> wrote: > H Frank, I'm having a lot of trouble seeing how a > worldly neutral > feeling is satisfying or dangerous. I guess I'm > ignorant. Duh, who > woulda thunk it? There's great Ajahn Chah story, goes something like this. One of the students asks him, "I can detect when aversion (the reaction to unpleasant feeling) arises, and I can detect when craving, (as the reaction to pleasant feeling) arises, but how do I detect delusion (the underlying root of neutral feeling)?" Ajahn Chah laughed out loud and said, "You are riding on the horse (of delusion) all the time and you're still looking for the horse!" ------------------------------- Another way to look at the 3 types of feelings: Delusion/avija/primordial ignorance is actually the underlying root of all 3 types of feelings. Craving and aversion are more immediate "causes" that are further down the chain, and because their disadvantages are more easily seen they are the focus of more discussion, but ignorance (of 4NT) is the root cause. Ignorance is not just a problem when craving and hatred arise. Ignorance (for the nonarhat)is a problem all the time, even when neutral feeling is predominant. -fk 14411 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 19, 2002 1:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] expanded version of Abh ? Dear Rob M, It is better to keep the book as it is. Different groups use it for discussion. Of course, questions will always come up, they are endless. However, I would like people to use my last edition which has additions and footnotes: that is of 1997. This is on Zolag web. In letters I have written on various Dhamma topics. These can be found on: http://www.zolag.co.uk/ http://www.abhidhamma.org/ http://www.dhammastudy.com/ http://www.buddhadhamma.com/> Best wishes, from Nina. op 16-07-2002 19:16 schreef robmoult op <>: Have you considered releasing an expanded version of > ADL, to include some of the issues & misunderstandings raised in > this group? 14412 From: frank kuan Date: Fri Jul 19, 2002 1:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 16 (2) I'm having a lot of trouble seeing how a > > worldly neutral > > feeling is satisfying or dangerous. To me, it makes more sense to apply the 5 aspects (origin, dissipation, gratification, danger, escape) to feeling as a class rather than applying it to each nuance of feeling. Otherwise, you get illogical weird artifacts like you point out above. Another one: how can unpleasant feeling be satisfying? -fk 14413 From: frank kuan Date: Fri Jul 19, 2002 1:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] Frankfood Hi Sarah, Among the excerpts you listed, I did not see my favorite one. The one about the 2 parents and their only beloved child crossing the desert in a famine. I'll refrain from mentioning details, as I know some of us on dsg are kind of squeamish. But that simile is awesome in putting into perspective what role eating should constitute in our lives. -fk 14414 From: robmoult Date: Fri Jul 19, 2002 2:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] expanded version of Abh ? Hi Nina, Understood. Sadhu, Sadhu, Sadhu, Rob M :-) --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Rob M, > It is better to keep the book as it is. Different groups use it for > discussion. Of course, questions will always come up, they are endless. > However, I would like people to use my last edition which has additions and > footnotes: that is of 1997. This is on Zolag web. > In letters I have written on various Dhamma topics. These can be found on: > http://www.zolag.co.uk/ > http://www.abhidhamma.org/ > http://www.dhammastudy.com/ > http://www.buddhadhamma.com/> > > Best wishes, from Nina. > 14415 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Jul 19, 2002 4:04am Subject: Dear O, (Num and Kom), I think we did it!! What an attractive group - clearly dsg-ers! Please go to http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/lst and click on photos 38 and 39. Yahoo wouldn't let me type in a longer description of the photos - so I'll have to tell the Group here that the first one is of Num and you at the Bridal Shop in Shop in San Francisco. The second one is of Kom, yourself, and Num when Num was transiting to Thailand via San Francisco. Everyone - O has offered a warm welcome to any DSG members passing through San Francisco and requests they get in touch (So she can collect more pictures! :):)) metta, Christine 14416 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Jul 19, 2002 4:14am Subject: RE: [dsg] (unknown) Dear Chris (and K. O) If my picture keeps showing up like this, pretty soon, I will need one of those scarfs. Hmm... Maybe I can just run for the exit whenever I see a camera. kom > -----Original Message----- > From: christine_forsyth > Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2002 1:04 PM > Subject: [dsg] (unknown) > > > Dear O, (Num and Kom), > > I think we did it!! What an attractive group - clearly dsg-ers! > Please go to > http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/lst > and click on photos 38 and 39. > Yahoo wouldn't let me type in a longer description of the photos - > so I'll have to tell the Group here that the first one is of Num and > you at the Bridal Shop in Shop in San Francisco. The second one is > of Kom, yourself, and Num when Num was transiting to Thailand via San > Francisco. > > Everyone - O has offered a warm welcome to any DSG members passing > through San Francisco and requests they get in touch (So she can > collect more pictures! :):)) > 14417 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Jul 19, 2002 4:33am Subject: RE: [dsg] ADL ch. 16 (2) Dear Larry, > -----Original Message----- > From: <> [mailto:<>] > Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 6:45 PM > Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 16 (2) > > > Hi Frank and Kom, I wonder how these terms relate to a neither pleasant > nor painful feeling. Does that kind of feeling have a different origin, > satisfaction, and peril? 'Escape' seems a little odd in this case as > well. Any comments? > > Larry > > "Being impinged on by a feeling that is neither painful nor pleasant, he > does not comprehend the origin nor the going down nor the satisfaction > nor the peril of that feeling nor the escape from it as it really is; a > tendency to ignorance is latent in him..." > I think the common origins (from dependent origination perspective) of all nama are ignorance and attachment. This includes the neutral feeling. The causes (from the conditionality perspectives) for neutral feelings are many. Frank has already given an example: the neutral feeling experienced at the 5th rupa jhana and above are much more refined than what we experience in the daily life. This is because the conditions of that jhanic netural feeling are different from those of everyday life's. The neutral feelings that appear on the 5 doors (excluding the body, where it must be bodily pleasant or bodily unpleasant) are also different: they all have different causes. The satisfaction is all the same everywhere: it's the attachment to whatever appears to the mind. The perils are also common. By way of the common characteristics: impermanence, dukkha, and anatta. By way of the dependent origination, with ignorance (and sometimes attachment) of the reality, the 5 kandhas are conditioned to arise, and we are stuck in the samsara... The escape ultimately always means nibbana, since it is where all conditioned realities cease. kom 14418 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Jul 19, 2002 4:35am Subject: Re: pictures of O, Kom and Num was (unknown) Dear Kom, I know the feeling! However ..... we have our devious ways. There would simply be an extra note (with link), saying 'To find the answer to the question "Who is that masked man?", simply go to photo 39'. :)But at least you men don't suffer from the 'flat hair' and 'no make- up' syndrome. (Good morning Sukin and Sumane) :) metta, Chris --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > Dear Chris (and K. O) > > If my picture keeps showing up like this, pretty soon, I will need one of > those scarfs. Hmm... Maybe I can just run for the exit whenever I see a > camera. > > kom > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: christine_forsyth > > Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2002 1:04 PM > > Subject: [dsg] (unknown) > > > > > > Dear O, (Num and Kom), > > > > I think we did it!! What an attractive group - clearly dsg-ers! > > Please go to > > http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/lst > > and click on photos 38 and 39. > > Yahoo wouldn't let me type in a longer description of the photos - > > so I'll have to tell the Group here that the first one is of Num and > > you at the Bridal Shop in Shop in San Francisco. The second one is > > of Kom, yourself, and Num when Num was transiting to Thailand via San > > Francisco. > > > > Everyone - O has offered a warm welcome to any DSG members passing > > through San Francisco and requests they get in touch (So she can > > collect more pictures! :):)) > > 14419 From: Howard Date: Fri Jul 19, 2002 2:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 16 (1) Larry and Rob M Hi again, Nina (and Larry) - In a message dated 7/17/02 6:25:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Howard writes: > It seems to me that one can *only* say that hardness occurs as the objective > > pole of a citta-aramanna event. > ========================== One more point with regard to this (to "underline it"): In one formulation of dependent arising, the Buddha said that vi~n~nana is condition for the arising of namarupa, and namarupa is condition for the arising of vi~n~nana, like two sheaves supporting each other, so that should either fall, so does the other. 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) 14420 From: <> Date: Fri Jul 19, 2002 6:58am Subject: ADL ch. 16 (4) http://www.budsas.org/ebud/nina-abhidhamma/nina-abhi-00.htm Abhidhamma In Daily Life Chapter 16 (4) The five classes of arammana which are visible object, sound, smell, taste and bodily impressions are rupa ; the sixth class, the six kinds of dhammarammana, comprises cittas, cetasikas, pasada rupas, subtle rupas, nibbana and also pannatti. Different objects can be experienced through different doorways (in Pali : dvara). For example, the pasada-rupa in the eye (the rupa which has the capacity to receive visible object) is a necessary condition for citta to experience visible object. If there were not pasada-rupa in the eye, citta could not experience visible object. Cittas of the sense-door process know their objects through the doors of the eye, the ear, the nose, the tongue and the body-sense. As regards the door of the body-sense, the pasada-rupa which has the capacity to receive bodily impressions such as hardness, softness, heat, cold, motion or pressure, is any part of the body which can receive such impressions. Thus, any part of the body can be body-door, except those parts which have no sensitivity. Five doors are rupa and one door is nama. The mind-door is nama. The cittas of the mind-door process experience an object through the mind-door. Before the mano-dvaravajjana-citta (mind-door-adverting-consciousness) arises there are the bhavanga-calana (vibrating bhavanga) and the bhavangupaccheda (arrest-bhavanga). The bhavangupaccheda, the citta preceding the mano-dvaravajjana-citta, is the mind-door. It is the 'doorway' through which mano-dvaravajjana-citta experiences its object. It is useful to know through which door cittas experience different objects. For example, visible object which is ruparammana can be experienced both through the eye-door and through the mind-door. It is experienced through the eye-door when it has not fallen away yet. When it is experienced by the cittas of the mind-door process following upon that eye-door process, it has just fallen away. When visible object is experienced through the mind-door the cittas only know visible object, they do not think of a person or a thing. But time and again there are also mind-door processes of cittas which think of people or things and then the object is a concept, not visible object. The experience of visible object conditions the thinking of concepts which arises later on. In both the sense-door process and the mind-door process, javana-cittas arise ; these javana-cittas are, if one is not an arahat, either kusala cittas or akusala cittas. When visible object is experienced through the eye-door, one does not yet perceive a person or a thing, but, already in the sense-door process, attachment to what is seen can arise, or aversion towards it, or ignorance. Defilements are deeply rooted, they can arise through all six doors. We may think that the enslavement to the objects which are experienced through the sense-doors is caused by the objects. Defilements, however, are not caused by objects, they are accumulated in the citta which experiences the object. We read in the 'Kindred Sayings' (IV, Salayatana-vagga, Fourth Fifty, Ch. III, par. 191, Kotthika) that Sariputta and Maha-Kotthika were staying near Varanasi at Isipatana, in the Antelope Park. Kotthika said to Sariputta : 'How now, friend? Is the eye the bond of objects, or are objects the bond of the eye? Is the tongue the bond of savours, or are savours the bond of the tongue? Is mind the bond of mind-objects, or are mind-objects the bond of the mind?' 'Not so, friend Kotthika. The eye is not the bond of objects, nor are objects the bond of the eye, but that desire and lust that arise owing to these two. That is the bond. And so with the tongue and mind...it is the desire and lust that arise owing to savours and tongue, mind-objects and mind. Suppose, friend, two oxen, one white and one black, tied by one rope or one yoke-tie. Would one be right in saying that the black ox is the bond for the white one, or that the white ox is the bond for the black one?' 'Surely not. Friend.' 'That is right, friend. It is not so. But the rope or the yoke-tie which binds the two, - - that is the bond that unites them. So it is with the eye and objects, with tongue and savours, with mind and mind-objects. It is the desire and lust which are in them that form the bond that unites them. If the eye, friend, were the bond of objects, or if objects were the bond of the eye, then this righteous life for the utter destruction of dukkha, could not be proclaimed. But since it is not so, but the desire and lust which are in them is the bond, therefore is the righteous life for the utter destruction of dukkha proclaimed... There is in the Exalted One an eye, friend. The Exalted One sees an object with the eye. But in the Exalted One is no desire and lust. Wholly heart-free is the Exalted One. There is in the Exalted One a tongue...a mind. But in the Exalted One is no desire and lust. Wholly heart-free is the Exalted One. By this method, friend, you are to understand, as I said before, that the bond is the desire and lust which are in things. Questions 1. Through which doors can motion be experienced? 2. Through which door can body-sense be experienced? 3. What class of arammana (object) is cohesion? 4. What class of arammana is lobha-mula-citta (citta rooted in attachment? 5. Through which door can lobha-mula-citta be experienced? 6. Through which doors can lobha-mula-citta experience an object? 7. What class of arammana is cold? 8. What class of arammana is bodily painful feeling? 9. What class of arammana is mental unpleasant feeling? 10. What class of arammana is panna (wisdom)? 11. Is the word 'peace' an arammana? If so, what class? 12. How many doors are rupa and how many are nama? 13. Can visible object be experienced through the mind-door? 14. Is visible object dhammarammana? 15. How many ahetuka cittas have ruparammana (visible object) as object? 16. How many ahetuka cittas have dhammarammana as object? 17. Through how many doors does citta know ruparammana? 18. Through how many doors does citta know dhammarammana? 19. How many classes of arammana are known through the mind-door? 14421 From: <> Date: Fri Jul 19, 2002 8:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 16 (2) Frank and Kom, thanks for the clarifications. If I understand you correctly, neutral feeling should be regarded as feeling in general and attachment to pleasant feeling and aversion to unpleasant feeling are defeated by the same reasoning which defeats ignorance. I include the whole passage below to refresh everyone's memory. Larry -------------- The Buddha then explained about the person who has attachments, aversion or ignorance with regard to what he experiences through the six doors. We read : 'Monks, visual consciousness arises because of eye and visible object, the meeting of the three is contact; an experience arises conditioned by contact that is pleasant or painful or neither painful nor pleasant. He, being impinged on by a pleasant feeling, delights, rejoices and persists in cleaving to it; a tendency to attachment is latent in him. Being impinged on by a painful feeling, he grieves, mourns, laments, beats his breast and falls into disillusion; a tendency to repugnance is latent in him. Being impinged on by a feeling that is neither painful nor pleasant, he does not comprehend the origin nor the going down nor the satisfaction nor the peril of that feeling nor the escape from it as it really is; a tendency to ignorance is latent in him...' The same is said with regard to the other doorways. The person who has 'wise attention' instead of attachment, aversion or ignorance can make an end to the cycle of birth and death. Further on we read : '... He, being impinged on by pleasant feeling, does not delight, rejoice or persist in cleaving to it; a tendency to attachment is not latent in him. Being impinged on by a painful feeling, he does not grieve, mourn, lament, beat his breast or fall into disillusion ; a tendency to repugnance is not latent in him. Being impinged on by a feeling that is neither painful nor pleasant, he comprehends the origin and the going down and the satisfaction and the peril of that feeling and the escape as it really is, a tendency to ignorance is not latent in him. That he, monks, by getting rid of any tendency to attachment to a pleasant feeling, by driving out any tendency to repugnance for a painful feeling, by rooting out any tendency to ignorance concerning a feeling that is neither painful nor pleasant, by getting rid of ignorance, by making knowledge arise, should here and now be an end-maker of dukkha--this situation exists. 14422 From: <> Date: Fri Jul 19, 2002 8:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 16 (1) Larry and Rob M Dear Goggler, thank you for your wise words but I had to laugh at this: "The question now is, how to develop these penatrative wisdom? I leave this to you, cos I think you know the `how´." The only 'how' I know is to jump in, but most of the time I miss the river all together. best wishes, Larry 14423 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Jul 19, 2002 8:56am Subject: RE: [dsg] ADL ch. 16 (1) Larry and Rob M Dear Larry & Howard, > -----Original Message----- > From: <> [mailto:<>] > Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 7:58 PM > Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 16 (1) Larry and Rob M > > > Hi Howard, you asked: > "How does one (anyone, including a Buddha) know a rupa that is not the > object of a citta?" > > I don't know how a Buddha knows things, but everyone else uses > inference, deduction, logic and other processes associated with reason. > Without it, we couldn't even formulate the idea of phenomenalism. But I > guess what we really want to know is how does a Buddha know dhammas. > > I would also acknowledge that a phenomenalist perspective has proven > throughout the centuries to be an effective liberative technique. > > best wishes, Larry I personally am in the camp of "other objects, even when the don't appear, exist". I of course, cannot prove this absolutely (at the paramatha level), but the model of realities given by the abhidhamma allows convincing (to me) deductions. Before I go into the brief discussion of deductions, let me say that whether or not the other objects that don't appear exist or not is a moot dicussion. We can only study objects that appear, and not objects that don't appear. Therefore, the following discussions don't help anyone in reaching nibbana. 1) A citta can experience nama or rupa, one at a time. We know that for the nama at the 5-door to exist, it must experience the rupa. They both must co-exist even though perhaps only one is experienced. 2) Hardness doesn't appear out of nowhere, it must be conditioned to arise. The abhidhamma's model gives an explanation that, for a non-living object, the rupa arises from a previous rupa (Utu [or dejo, or fire dhatu]). If you experience hardness of a non-living object now, it can be deduced (from the explanation) that the conditions causing the hardness to arise is the fire dhatu of another group of rupa (not experienced). If one believes that rupa only exists while it is being experienced, then you must also believe that all rupas are conditioned to arise ry the cognition (of the mind) itself. This would seem to contradict my everyday (non-paramatha) observation of how the world works. kom 14424 From: <> Date: Fri Jul 19, 2002 9:53am Subject: RE: [dsg] ADL ch. 16 (1) Larry and Rob M Hi Kom, this discusson reminds me of a way of discriminating between nama and rupa. That is, by discriminating between internal and external. Internal is nama and external is rupa. The key point is that there are no nama qualities in the rupa, although we do often forget that. Thinking that beautiful and ugly or even healthy and unhealthy are qualities of rupa. Basically this body is merely a nimble corpse; it doesn't touch or feel anything. Nama experiences touch and feeling. I would be interested to see how you and Howard understand this distinction. Larry ------------------ Kom wrote: I personally am in the camp of "other objects, even when the don't appear, exist". I of course, cannot prove this absolutely (at the paramatha level), but the model of realities given by the abhidhamma allows convincing (to me) deductions. Before I go into the brief discussion of deductions, let me say that whether or not the other objects that don't appear exist or not is a moot dicussion. We can only study objects that appear, and not objects that don't appear. Therefore, the following discussions don't help anyone in reaching nibbana. 1) A citta can experience nama or rupa, one at a time. We know that for the nama at the 5-door to exist, it must experience the rupa. They both must co-exist even though perhaps only one is experienced. 2) Hardness doesn't appear out of nowhere, it must be conditioned to arise. The abhidhamma's model gives an explanation that, for a non-living object, the rupa arises from a previous rupa (Utu [or dejo, or fire dhatu]). If you experience hardness of a non-living object now, it can be deduced (from the explanation) that the conditions causing the hardness to arise is the fire dhatu of another group of rupa (not experienced). If one believes that rupa only exists while it is being experienced, then you must also believe that all rupas are conditioned to arise by the cognition (of the mind) itself. This would seem to contradict my everyday (non-paramatha) observation of how the world works. kom 14425 From: abhidhammika Date: Fri Jul 19, 2002 10:12pm Subject: Assaji's Beautiful Brief Restatement Dear Dhamma Friends Sergei asked the following. "Does anyone know of a story that runs like this: The master is teaching in a grove of trees somewhere. A visitor approaches and asks, "What does this master teach?" and the reply from someone departing is "He teaches that everything that happens is caused. I saw this in a book one time and then couldn't find it again. Could anyone cite a sutra or some Buddhist commentary that contains this?" Sergei's question has reminded me of Assaji's beautiful brief restatement of the essence of the Buddha's teachings. Therefore, I wrote the following reply to him. I hope you also find it useful! Suan ------------------------------------------------------ Dear Sergei90245 How are you? I am not sure about your story. However, there is an episode of how Saariputta became the disciple of the Buddha after having met with Assaji, one of the First Five Disciples of the Buddha, and having listened to Assaji's brief restatement. The brief restatement, which is very beautiful, is as follows. "Ye dhammaa hetuppabhavaa, tesam hetum tathaagato aaha; tesañca yo nirodho, evamvaadii mahaasama.no"ti. "The Buddha Tathaagato told us the cause of those phenomena which have causes as their beginnings, and the cessation of those phenomena as well. The Great Ascetic is such a teacher." The above episode and that beautiful brief restatement can be found in Section 60, Mahaakhandhako, Mahaavaggo, Vinaya Pi.taka. (Roman Edition, Volume One, page. 39) "Tesañca yo nirodhoti tesam ubhinnampi saccaanam yo appavattinirodho; tañca tathaagato aahaati attho." "Tesañca yo nirodho" means that the Buddha Tathaagato also taught the cessation, the no-longer-arising, of both those truths, namely the Noble Truth of Misery and the Noble Truth of Attachment (i.e, both phenomena and their causes)." The above quote comes from the commentary on Mahaavaggo, Vinaya Pi.tako. I hope that the above information satisfied your curiosity somewhat before someone else could locate the exact story you are after. With kind regards, Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ 14426 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jul 20, 2002 1:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Class Dear Rob M, Excellent that you want the Abh study relevant for daily life. 75 minutes is long, is there a tea break? It would help if the 75 minutes are spent by way of question and answer related to the subject. I hope you can meet A. Sujin one day, you are in the region. Now you have quite a list, and it may be good if you remind us all of the next topic, one at a time. Because it is really useful and interesting to see what different people write and what points they stress in accordance with their accumulations. So, the next one is adosa: khanti and metta. Nothing is really easy I find, especially when it comes to the practice. You may like the Roots of Good and Evil, Ven. Nyanaponika, Wheel, 251-253. Also under useful posts you may find the subjects of metta and patience. Or A. Sujin's book which I translated: Metta, Loving kindness in Buddhism, which is on line: Zolag. She gives guidance on the development of metta and points out the impediments. I shall select some of her points, but I do hope others in this forum will help also, especially handing out examples from daily life. That is what you want, you have plenty of books already. You could also try my "Perfections leading to Enlightenment", on Abh. Org. web. It could give you ideas about metta, upekkha, etc. It is difficult to treat a subject in isolation, everything is connected with everything. When you speak about metta, TMt is also hard at work. When you speak about the abstinences you have to speak about metta, which is very necessary for abstention from evil. It is all most intricate. What is sangdikha dana? Is the class in China? You have to travel a lot. Best wishes, Nina. op 17-07-2002 22:35 schreef robmoult op <>: > My objective is to make the subject come alive, relevant in daily > life, drive people to action. This is where I am hoping to get help > from this group. I have lots of reference books (I recently picked > up more than 50 books/booklets on a trip to Colombo). What I am > looking for are ways of making the material come alive to a non- > academic group of parents. > > The class schedule for the next few weeks is as follows: > Jul 21 - Sangdikha Dana (no class) > Jul 28 - Tatramajjhattata / six pairs > Aug 4 - Adosa (Khanti + Metta) > Aug 11 - I will probably be on vacation > Aug 18 - Start the wholesome occasional cetasikas (Vaci-duccarita > Virati - abstinence from wrong speech ) > Aug 25 - Kaya-duccarita Virati (Abstinence from Wrong Action) > > Metta is a farily easy topic to make relevant to people's lives, but > I would be happy to start collecting ideas on how to make the three > abstinences more interesting. 14427 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jul 20, 2002 1:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] rupas out there Hi, Howard, Sarah and I wrote about rupas before, and I know that what I have written does not always agree with your phenomenolgical outlook on life. A few days ago you called out, this is phenomenology, when reading a part of my Abh on objects and doors. I was surprised. What in particular was in agreement with your outlook? I do not know quite how to answer your questions. Hardness does not exist on its own, it is part of a group of rupas, kalapa, which arise and fall away. Some more about the table out there: what we call a table are in fact lots of groups of rupas arising and falling away, conditioned by heat. In each group of rupas out there there are: the four Great elements of earth, water, fire, wind. Earth is the foundation of the other rupas, water or cohesion holds them together. There are also the four derived rupas of colour, odour, flavour and nutritive essence. Only one of these rupas can be experienced at a time. If you lick at what we call a table flavour may appear: when flavour is the object of citta, all the accompanying rupas are there together with flavour in a group, but they are not experienced. For Howard, there is nothing in the world at that moment, except flavour and that is right. But there is no Howard who experiences, tasting experiences the flavour. When you smell what we call a table, odour appears, the other rupas are there together with odour, but they do not appear. As regards nutrition, there may not be Howard food, but insects may like to eat it. Thus there are many rupas but not all of them can be experienced at the same time. The Visuddhimagga classifies rupas as internal and external, as far and near. I quote part of my Rupas, with the risk that you do not like it :-) : Thus, there are rupas which are not suitable for comprehension. Anyway, you do not have to occupy yourself with those. We can start with what can be directly experienced. But there is more under the sun. Best wishes from Nina. op 18-07-2002 00:24 schreef Howard op Howard: > -------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > When hardness is not the object of a citta, *where* does it abide? It > is a rupa, but not always an aramanna. So what is its existential status when > not an object? Where is it? In the land of Plato's ideals??? ;-)) > My not so subtle point is that I do not buy the idea of rupas existing > independently of vi~n~nana. One cannot say, for example, that hardness exists > as a characteristic of some "thing out there" like a table, or a floor, or a > tree, because these are just concepts. And one also cannot say that hardness > exists in some disembodied fashion all on its own, in some Platonic heaven. > It seems to me that one can *only* say that hardness occurs as the objective > pole of a citta-aramanna event. > ============================= 14428 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jul 20, 2002 1:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 16 (1) objects in the mind-door process. Dear Larry, When the mind-door process follows upon a sense-door process, say, eye-door process, the visible object has only just fallen away when it is experienced by cittas of the mind-door process. Rupa does not last longer than 17 moments of cittas, thus, it has fallen away when the succeeding mind-door process begins. Someone asked A. Sujin whether visible object experienced through the mind-door is the same as visible object experienced through the eye-door, and she said, exactly the same. Just because of the speed of the cittas that succeed one another. All javana cittas in one process experience the same object. When the object of the cittas in the mind-door process is a nama, that object has fallen away but it can still be experienced. I hope this clarifies somewhat, Nina. op 18-07-2002 04:40 schreef <> op <>: > While I have your eye, I wanted to ask you how long the objects in > mind-door process last. For example, are there 7 different objects > during the javana series? > > 14429 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jul 20, 2002 1:00am Subject: Perfections, Ch 3, no 2: Perfections, Ch 3, no 2. Sakka thought that if Akitti would aspire to become Sakka he would fulfill the perfection of generosity, dåna, and give away his food. We read: When the ascetic Akitti noticed that the brahmin was in need of food, he took the sodden Kåra leaves and gave them all to the brahmin. He did the same the second day and the third day. Here we see that the kusala he performed at those times were actually the perfections of generosity, dåna, of morality, síla, of renunciation, nekkhamma, of patience, khanti, of energy, viriya, of determination or steadfastness, adiììhåna, and of truthfulness, sacca, that is, sincerity in the performing of kusala. He fulfilled the perfections in order to attain Buddhahood. All perfections are interrelated and they support one another. Akitti was steadfast in generosity, he did not hesitate because of avarice. He did not long for anything in life, not even for something very slight. This is the perfection of sincerity. We read: The ascetic Akitti was unshakable in generosity while he offered his sodden Kåra leaves for three consecutive days. He fulfilled the perfection of loving kindness, mettå, by his disposition to give assistance to all beings. He fulfilled the perfection of equanimity, upekkhå, by evenmindedness or neutrality, not being disturbed by contrariness in conduct of people or contrariness in phenomena. Sakka begged for food for three consecutive days, but the ascetic Akitti was unshakable in his determination to give, and he gave, no matter who was asking. We read: As regards the perfection of paññå, he knows which dhammas are beneficial conditions for the fulfillment of the perfections and which are not. He abandons the dhammas which are not beneficial and he directs his practice towards those which are beneficial. When Sakka knew the disposition of the ascetic Akitti, he offered a boon, whereupon the Great Being, the ascetic Akitti, explained the Dhamma with regard to the receiving of boons. Further on in the Commentary we read: Sakka noticed that the ascetic Akitti dwellt in contentedness. He asked him: ³What, great Brahmin, are you wishing for, that you are dwelling here all alone in the heat?² Sakka interrogated Akitti because he wanted to know about his sincerity in practising virtue to the highest degree, so that even Sakka called him great Brahmin. We read: Akitti answered, ³Sakka, King of the devas, rebirth is dukkha, the breaking up of the body is dukkha, and dying with delusion is dukkha. Therefore I dwell here all alone.² Sakka answered: ³Well spoken Kassapa 2) , you expressed this very well. I will give you a boon, choose whatever you wish.² One may have wonder what this means. Here the firm determination for the development of kusala is shown of the ascetic Akitti who wishes for a boon. The boon that he wishes for are all ten perfections. Footnote: 2. This may have been the name of his clan, the Kassapa clan. 14430 From: Howard Date: Fri Jul 19, 2002 9:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 16 (1) Larry and Rob M Hi, Larry (and Kom) - In a message dated 7/18/02 9:54:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time, <> writes: > > Hi Kom, this discusson reminds me of a way of discriminating between > nama and rupa. That is, by discriminating between internal and external. > Internal is nama and external is rupa. The key point is that there are > no nama qualities in the rupa, although we do often forget that. > Thinking that beautiful and ugly or even healthy and unhealthy are > qualities of rupa. Basically this body is merely a nimble corpse; it > doesn't touch or feel anything. Nama experiences touch and feeling. > > I would be interested to see how you and Howard understand this > distinction. > > Larry > =========================== What you are asking for is the distinction between what appears at the mind door and at the other sense doors. I can no better express this in words than I can express in words the difference between visual objects and auditory objects. We know them when we see, hear, or "mentate" them! ;-)) 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) 14431 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Jul 20, 2002 3:08am Subject: RE: [dsg] ADL ch. 16 (1) Larry and Rob M Larry, > -----Original Message----- > From: Howard [mailto:Howard] > Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 10:29 AM > Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 16 (1) Larry and Rob M > > > > Hi Kom, this discusson reminds me of a way of discriminating between > > nama and rupa. That is, by discriminating between internal and external. > > Internal is nama and external is rupa. The key point is that there are > > no nama qualities in the rupa, although we do often forget that. > > Thinking that beautiful and ugly or even healthy and unhealthy are > > qualities of rupa. Basically this body is merely a nimble corpse; it > > doesn't touch or feel anything. Nama experiences touch and feeling. > > > > I would be interested to see how you and Howard understand this > > distinction. > > > > Larry > > I don't think I can summarize this better than you have already done! kom 14432 From: Howard Date: Fri Jul 19, 2002 11:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] rupas out there Hi, Nina - In a message dated 7/19/02 1:01:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Nina writes: > > Hi, Howard, > Sarah and I wrote about rupas before, and I know that what I have written > does not always agree with your phenomenolgical outlook on life. A few days > ago you called out, this is phenomenology, when reading a part of my Abh on > objects and doors. I was surprised. What in particular was in agreement > with > your outlook? > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: For example, you wrote "When we touch the log of wood, hardness or cold, for example, can be experienced through the body-sense. We take the log of wood for a thing which lasts, but what we call 'log of wood' are many different rupas which arise and fall away." When and where do they arise and fall away? I presumed you meant that they arise with a citta-process and fall away with the termination of that process. But evidently I'm wrong in this presumption. So I still must ask how one knows about paramattha dhammas that are not cognized, and also ask where dhammas such as hardness, or warmth, or greenness abide when not cognized. The average person "knows" where a tree is - he/she will tell us that it is "out there" in the world, most particularly on their front lawn or in the back yard, and that hardness, roughness, leaf-shapes, greenness, and brownness are all just characteristics of that tree. But Abhidhamma tells us, I understand, that trees are mere concept, and all that is "real" are the hardness, roughness, leaf-shapes, greenness, and brownness. So, when these paramattha dhammas are not experienced, where are they, in what sense do they exist, and how are they known to exist? The fact that they co-occur tells us what? That they are interrelated? Or that the package comprised of them is not mere concept but also is "real". And even if that latter proposition were true, though it seems to contradict the Abhidhamma understanding of pa~n~natti, one would still be justified in asking where and in what manner such a package of dhammas, when they are not cognized, exists. As I see it, paramattha dhammas and relations among them are all that actually exist, their existence being fleeting and interdependent with the knowing of them, and conditioned by previous dhammas. When they are not cognized, they are mere possibilities/potentialities, possibilities which become actualities only when the necessary conditions for their arising have occurred. To be sure, there is a lawfulness to the arising of related dhammas, and to be sure, there is an intersubjectivity to experience - we are not in this realm alone, but these facts do not imply anything beyond the lawfulness of conditionality and certain commonalities of experience among sentient beings. -------------------------------------------------------------- > I do not know quite how to answer your questions. Hardness does not exist on > its own, it is part of a group of rupas, kalapa, which arise and fall away. > Some more about the table out there: what we call a table are in fact lots > of groups of rupas arising and falling away, conditioned by heat. In each > group of rupas out there there are: > the four Great elements of earth, water, fire, wind. Earth is the > foundation > of the other rupas, water or cohesion holds them together. There are also > the four derived rupas of colour, odour, flavour and nutritive essence. > Only one of these rupas can be experienced at a time. If you lick at what > we > call a table flavour may appear: when flavour is the object of citta, all > the accompanying rupas are there together with flavour in a group, but they > are not experienced. For Howard, there is nothing in the world at that > moment, except flavour and that is right. But there is no Howard who > experiences, tasting experiences the flavour. When you smell what we call a > table, odour appears, the other rupas are there together with odour, but > they do not appear. As regards nutrition, there may not be Howard food, but > insects may like to eat it. > Thus there are many rupas but not all of them can be experienced at the > same > time. > The Visuddhimagga classifies rupas as internal and external, as far and > near. I quote part of my Rupas, with the risk that you do not like it :-) > : > kinds > of rúpa are gross: visible object, sound, odour, flavour and the three > great > elements which are tangible object (excluding cohesion), as well as the > five > sense-organs. They are gross because of impinging; visible object impinges > on the eyesense, sound impinges on the earsense, and each of the other > sense > objects impinges on the appropriate sense-base. > --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Where are those visible objects, sounds, and other sense objects when not cognized? If we say they exist as characteristics of conventional objects such as trees and tables, then we are not talking Abhidhamma. What sort of visual image is unseen? What sort of sound is unheard? (Compaction and rarefaction of matter moving as a wave? That is mere concept!) ---------------------------------------------------------- The other sixteen kinds of> > rúpa are subtle. What is subtle is called ³far² because it is difficult to > penetrate, whereas what is gross is called ³near², because it is easy to > penetrate (Vis. XIV, 73). > Furthermore, other distinctions can be made. Rúpas can be classified as > sabhava rúpas, rúpas with their own distinct nature, and asabhava rúpas, > rúpas without their own distinct nature. The twelve gross rúpas and six > among the subtle rúpas that are: cohesion, nutrition, life faculty, > heart-base, femininity and masculinity are rupas each with their own > distinct nature and characteristic, they are sabhåva rúpas. > The other ten subtle rúpas do not have their own distinct nature, they are > asabhåva rúpas. Among these are the two kinds of intimation, bodily > intimation and speech intimation, which are a ³certain, unique change² in > the eight inseparable rúpas produced by citta. Moreover, the three > qualities > of lightness, plasticity and wieldiness that can be classified together > with > the two rúpas of intimation as vikåra rúpas (rúpa as changeability or > alteration). Furthermore, there is the rúpa space (akåsa or pariccheda > rúpa) > that delimits the groups of rúpa. Also included are the four rúpas that are > characteristics of rúpa, namely birth, continuity, decay and impermanence. > Rúpas can be classified as produced rúpas, nipphanna rúpas, and unproduced > rúpas, anipphanna rúpas. The sabhåva rúpas are also called ³produced², > whereas the asabhåva rúpas are also called ³unproduced²5. The ³produced > rúpas² which each have their own characteristic are, as the ³Visuddhimagga² > (XVIII, 13) explains, ³suitable for comprehension², that is, they are > objects of which right understanding can be developed. For example, visible > object or hardness have characteristics that can be objects of awareness > when they appear, and they can be realized by paññå as they are, as > non-self. The ³unproduced rúpas² are ³not suitable for comprehension² since > they are qualities of rúpa such as changeability or the rúpa that delimits > groups of rúpas. If one does not know this distinction one may be led to > wrong practice of insight; someone may imagine that he can be directly > aware > of ³unproduced rúpas², that are not concrete matter, such as lightness of > matter.> > > Thus, there are rupas which are not suitable for comprehension. Anyway, you > do not have to occupy yourself with those. We can start with what can be > directly experienced. But there is more under the sun. > Best wishes from Nina. > > ============================ Nina, I do not "insist" on my phenomenalist position. But I have a problem with seeing how an "objectivist" view (to use an Ayn Randian phrase) is compatible with the Dhamma, especially with Abhidhamma. 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) 14433 From: <> Date: Sat Jul 20, 2002 6:36am Subject: RE: [dsg] ADL ch. 16 (1) Larry and Rob M Dear Kom and Howard, I was trying to get you guys to debate one another, not debate me. The issue is how do you understand the difference between nama and rupa (this differentiation being a key 'first step' on the path of purification, I think?). Is the phenomenalist perspective saying all there is is experience? If so, wouldn't that necessitate that _both_ rupa and citta are equally ficticious, or at least equally conventional? I was thinking of this as a possible 'next step' after a more dualistic discrimination. Or are the two views incompatible? I'm not exactly crystal clear on phenomenology or the correct way to understand nama and rupa or the remainder of the path of purification. It's all a bit murky. Does this make sense? Larry 14434 From: yuzhonghao Date: Sat Jul 20, 2002 6:40am Subject: [dsg] Re: formal sitting and corruptions of insight Jon, Thank you for taking the time to reply. I understand that you have doubts about my approach. What is my approach? To make it clear, it is to follow the Buddha's instruction on being mindful of breathing as recorded in http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn118.html Regards, Victor --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Victor > > <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< > Hi Jon and all, > > Hmmm, this thread is not mine anyway. > > Questions: > 1. What is 'withdrawal from sensuality and unskillful qualities', and > how is that accomplished? > > Answers: > Unskillful qualities are to be understood as passion, aversion, and > delusion. They are also to be understood as sensual desire, ill- > will, sloth and drowsiness, restlessness and worry, and doubt. When > one withdraws from sensuality and unskillful qualities, one abandons > them. How is that accomplished? Please refer this discourse in > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn020.html > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > Jon: > I think we are going around in circles here, Victor ;-)). You refer above > to the abandoning of the hindrances (I think), but in the texts this > normally implies jhana. This would mean that before sitting down to focus > on the breath (in order to develop Right Concentration), jhana would be > needed first. > > Is this how you see it? > > <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< > Question: > 2. What is the difference in the mental state between-- > a) one who is withdrawn from sensuality and unskillful qualities, and > b) one who is withdrawn from sensuality and unskillful qualities and > whose mind is focussed on in and out breathing? > > For Question 2, Jon, I would suggest to: > Sit in a secluded place with leg crossed and eye closed. Withdraw > from sensuality and unskillful qualities. Focus on in and out > breathing. See for yourself, Jon. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > Jon: > In asking this question, I had in mind that a mind that is focussed on the > breath could be either kusala or akusala. Since the purpose here is the > development of Right Concentration, which obviously arises only with > kusala citta, is it your view that mind with breath as object is more > likely to be kusala than mind without breath as object? I am not aware of > any basis for that in the texts. And anyway, how would a person know > whether the citta is kusala or akusala? > > Alternatively, if you are postulating a mind that is already kusala -- > since you refer to 'withdrawal from sensuality and unskilful qualities' (a > pretty big 'if', I believe) -- then what additional benefit do you see as > following from focussing the mind on breath? > > You suggest that rather than seek to understand the theory I should simply > try it and see for myself. I am not aware of the Buddha ever suggesting > or endorsing this approach. Indeed, he spent the whole of his life after > enlightenment explaining the why's and wherefore's to those who would > listen (many became enlightened while listening and considering as he > spoke). > > Quite apart from the doubts I have about your approach, the state of being > 'withdrawn from sensuality and unskilful qualities' doesn't sound like me, > so I don't think I even make it to first base ;-)) > > Joking aside though, Victor, it is useful to exchange views on these > important areas, and I am grateful for the opportunity to do so with you. > > Jon > > > 14435 From: <> Date: Sat Jul 20, 2002 7:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 16 (1) objects in the mind-door process. Thanks Nina, this is interesting and furthers understanding. best wishes, Larry ----------------- Nina wrote: Dear Larry, When the mind-door process follows upon a sense-door process, say, eye-door process, the visible object has only just fallen away when it is experienced by cittas of the mind-door process. Rupa does not last longer than 17 moments of cittas, thus, it has fallen away when the succeeding mind-door process begins. Someone asked A. Sujin whether visible object experienced through the mind-door is the same as visible object experienced through the eye-door, and she said, exactly the same. Just because of the speed of the cittas that succeed one another. All javana cittas in one process experience the same object. When the object of the cittas in the mind-door process is a nama, that object has fallen away but it can still be experienced. I hope this clarifies somewhat, Nina. 14436 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Sat Jul 20, 2002 9:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] rupas out there --- Howard wrote: > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > For example, you wrote "When we touch the log of wood, hardness or > cold, for example, can be experienced through the body-sense. We take the log > of wood for a thing which lasts, but what we call 'log of wood' are many > different rupas which arise and fall away." > When and where do they arise and fall away? _--------------- Dear Howard, They arise and fall away immediately - it is happening so fast, whether one knows it or not. Even this whole universe , every tiny kalapa only last for the briefest instant. -------------- I presumed you meant that > they arise with a citta-process and fall away with the termination of that > process. But evidently I'm wrong in this presumption. > So I still must ask how one knows about paramattha dhammas that are > not cognized, and also ask where dhammas such as hardness, or warmth, or > greenness abide when not cognized. The average person "knows" where a tree is > - he/she will tell us that it is "out there" in the world, most particularly > on their front lawn or in the back yard, and that hardness, roughness, > leaf-shapes, greenness, and brownness are all just characteristics of that > tree. But Abhidhamma tells us, I understand, that trees are mere concept, and > all that is "real" are the hardness, roughness, leaf-shapes, greenness, and > brownness. ________ I do not think the Abhidhamma says that leaf-shape is a paramattha dhamma. I think you know that every kalapa is comprised of eight types of rupa at a minimum. What we call a tree comprises trillions of extraordinarily evanescent kalapas. _______ So, when these paramattha dhammas are not experienced, where are > they, in what sense do they exist, and how are they known to exist? The fact > that they co-occur tells us what? That they are interrelated? Or that the > package comprised of them is not mere concept but also is "real". And even if > that latter proposition were true, though it seems to contradict the > Abhidhamma understanding of pa~n~natti, one would still be justified in > asking where and in what manner such a package of dhammas, when they are not > cognized, exists. ------------------------ We know this from the teachings and from inference. I find it difficult to see how you can believe that while you are asleep , for instant, that the entire material universe has truly disappeared - and that even while awake only the very tiny parts you experience exist. It would mean the whole universe comes into being only for Howard, as if you were the creator. But anyway rupas are conditioned by several factors, not only citta. ------------------ > > Howard: > Where are those visible objects, sounds, and other sense objects when > not cognized? If we say they exist as characteristics of conventional objects > such as trees and tables, then we are not talking Abhidhamma. What sort of > visual image is unseen? What sort of sound is unheard? (Compaction and > rarefaction of matter moving as a wave? That is mere concept!) > ---------------------------------------------------------- Sound arises because it is conditioned to arise - whether it is experienced or not. For example, while I am writing this my son just came in and asked a question. You can't hear these sounds - in this case called vacivinnati(verbal intimation) but I can assure you there was sound and that indeed I experience sounds everyday. Even though you don't experience those sounds doesn't make them less real. Robert 14437 From: Howard Date: Sat Jul 20, 2002 5:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 16 (1) Larry and Rob Mnan Hi, Larry - In a message dated 7/19/02 6:37:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time, <> writes: > Dear Kom and Howard, I was trying to get you guys to debate one another, > not debate me. The issue is how do you understand the difference > between nama and rupa (this differentiation being a key 'first step' on > the path of purification, I think?). > ------------------------------------------ Howard: It seems easy to me to distinguish mental (nama) from physical (rupa). At least I don't believe I confuse them. Desires, aversions, feelings, thoughts, memories, and discernment (vi~n~nana) itself are experienced quite differently from sights, sounds, tastes, hardness/softness, pressures, aches, textures etc. As I understand it, phenomenalism is simply the position that all that is known or knowable is what is experienced, and radical phenomenalism amounts to the mix of phenomenalism with pragmatism which says that whatever is in principle unknowable is, for all intents and purposes, nonexistent. Experience, at least the dualistic experience of worldlings, consists of what Bhikkhu ~Nanananda, in his commentary on the Kalakarama Sutta, refers to as the vi~n~nana-namarupa "vortex", that meeting point of citta and arammana where there is merely the seen, the heard, the tasted, the smelled, the touched, and the cognized (i.e., namarupa) co-occurring with the act of discernment (i.e., vi~n~nana), two sheaves mutually supporting each other. ----------------------------------------------------------- > > Is the phenomenalist perspective saying all there is is experience? ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes. Ot at least that all that can be known and pragmatically presumed to exist is that which is experienced. ----------------------------------------------------- If> > so, wouldn't that necessitate that _both_ rupa and citta are equally > ficticious, or at least equally conventional? > -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't see why. The fact that citta and arammana (and the object may be either nama or rupa) are interdependent, doesn't make either of them fictitious. It merely makes them two opposing aspects of one experiential event. Think of a box: there is no inside without an outside, and no outside without an inside, but that doen't make either of these fictitious (to use a conventional analogy). -------------------------------------------------------- > > I was thinking of this as a possible 'next step' after a more dualistic > discrimination. Or are the two views incompatible? I'm not exactly > crystal clear on phenomenology or the correct way to understand nama and > rupa or the remainder of the path of purification. It's all a bit murky. > -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm trying to get your meaning here. I think that perhaps you are considering that there is a unity of opposites involved, and that the vi~n~nana-namarupa (or citta-arammana) event is a nondual reality which lies "a step beyond". Well, I think that this has a lot to it! I personally see the cognitive event of knowing an object to be primary, with the knowing and the known being interdependent aspects of that event. But this does not make either the knowing or the known fictitious or nonexistent; it merely makes them mutually conditioned and, thereby, empty of self. As I see it, the mutual dependence of subject and object is part of their emptiness. The rest of reason for their emptiness is their dependence on previous conditions for their arising. Emptiness of most dhammas comes from conditionality. The exception to this is nibbana. Nibbana is empty in a more thorough way, being the complete absence of all possible conditions, making it the ultimate emptiness, making it "the other" of all conditions. -------------------------------------------------------------- > > Does this make sense? > > Larry > ============================== 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) 14438 From: robmoult Date: Sat Jul 20, 2002 10:11am Subject: Vegetarianism Hi all, I was eating a burger with a Christian friend and he said, "I thought that Buddhists were supposed to be vegetarian." I said that all Buddhists should follow the first precept, to abstain from killing. Many Mahayana Buddhists are vegetarian because they interpret the eating of meat as indirect killing of animals. My understanding of the Theravada perspective is that if the animal was not killed explicitly for me, then eating meat is okay. In other words, I cannot go to one of those seafood restaurants where you pick the fish that you want to eat, but I can order fish from the menu or buy it in the supermarket. My friend said, "I am an accountant. I don't like ambiguity. So, who is right? Something as fundamental as a precept should not be left open for wide interpretation." I pondered. My friend continued, "Is it true that after enlightenment, the Buddha upheld all of the precepts." I said that it was true. He then asked, "Did the Buddha eat meat?" I said that I thought that there were instances when the Buddha ate meat when it was given to him. My friend said, "So then eating meat is not breaking a precept." So here is my question to the DSG. I agree with my friend that something as fundamental as a precept should not be left open for wide interpretation. However, I don't want to say that the Mahayanists are wrong. What is your view? Thanks, Rob M :-) 14439 From: robmoult Date: Sat Jul 20, 2002 10:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Class Hi Nina, 75 minutes does sound like a long time, but it goes quickly. I prepare a lot and sometimes, I go over my time. The tea break is after my class and before Bro. Teo's class (also 75 minutes). We then have a 30 minute break before our hour of vipassana. It is a great way to spend a Sunday morning (8:45 – 13:00). Depending on the subject, there can be a lot of Q&A, though Asians are nowhere near as forthcoming as Westerners are. I will make an effort to meet A. Sujin the next time I go to Bangkok. I really appreciate all the pointers to additional material that you have given me. I would say that I feel very lucky to have stumbled across the DSG, but I can't say this as "feeling lucky" is a form of mana (conceit) :-) I would really appreciate input from the DSG on practical application of Khanti and Metta. I have lots of theory, what I am looking for are practical tips on making Khanti and Metta a bigger part of our daily lives. A sangdikha dana is a tradition in our Vihara (perhaps it is uniquely Sri Lankan) whereby we "sponsor" a vegetarian lunch for the monks and any other devotees who want to partake. The teacher of the "Buddhism for Beginners" class for 20 years recently passed away and so his ex-students (most of the teachers and adult students in the Vihara) are performing this sangdikha dana to transfer the merit to him. We have collected more than US$600 to pay the caterers (that's a lot of noodles) and many people are bringing additional food as well. There are a lot of people at the Vihara, so the food won't go to waste. The classes are in Malaysia, but I travel to China for work. Most of China (except Tibet) is Mahayana, but there is some Theravada in Yunnan province (Kunming). So far, I don't have any Dhamma-friends in China. Thanks, Rob M :-) --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Rob M, > Excellent that you want the Abh study relevant for daily life. 75 minutes is > long, is there a tea break? It would help if the 75 minutes are spent by way > of question and answer related to the subject. I hope you can meet A. Sujin > one day, you are in the region. > Now you have quite a list, and it may be good if you remind us all of the > next topic, one at a time. Because it is really useful and interesting to > see what different people write and what points they stress in accordance > with their accumulations. > So, the next one is adosa: khanti and metta. Nothing is really easy I find, > especially when it comes to the practice. You may like the Roots of Good and > Evil, Ven. Nyanaponika, Wheel, 251-253. Also under useful posts you may find > the subjects of metta and patience. Or A. Sujin's book which I translated: > Metta, Loving kindness in Buddhism, which is on line: Zolag. She gives > guidance on the development of metta and points out the impediments. I shall > select some of her points, but I do hope others in this forum will help > also, especially handing out examples from daily life. That is what you > want, you have plenty of books already. > You could also try my "Perfections leading to Enlightenment", on Abh. Org. > web. It could give you ideas about metta, upekkha, etc. > It is difficult to treat a subject in isolation, everything is connected > with everything. When you speak about metta, TMt is also hard at work. When > you speak about the abstinences you have to speak about metta, which is very > necessary for abstention from evil. It is all most intricate. > What is sangdikha dana? Is the class in China? You have to travel a lot. > Best wishes, > Nina. > 14440 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Jul 20, 2002 10:26am Subject: Re: Vegetarianism Hi Rob M, The Precepts, as I understand, are training rules not Commandments, but this is a question and comes up often on discussion lists, and in interaction with others in my life as well ... I did become a vegetarian for a while, and enjoyed it, until I realised how many sentient beings are destroyed (literally in the millions) for each acre of vegetables ploughed, fertilised and sprayed. And yet, vegetarians keep buying vegetables and fruits, or even gardening themselves. Interesting. Everything we do can cause harm. A few links for your weekend reading. :) metta, Christine On Vegetarianism http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha022.htm Vinaya - What the Buddha said about eating meat http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha022.htm Buddhism and Vegetarianism http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha151.htm Buddhism and Vegetarianism - the Rationale for the Buddhas' views on the consumption of meat http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha069.htm Are you a Herbivore or a Carnivore http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha156.htm Vegetarianism http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha189.htm --- "robmoult" wrote: > Hi all, > > I was eating a burger with a Christian friend and he said, "I > thought that Buddhists were supposed to be vegetarian." > > I said that all Buddhists should follow the first precept, to > abstain from killing. Many Mahayana Buddhists are vegetarian because > they interpret the eating of meat as indirect killing of animals. My > understanding of the Theravada perspective is that if the animal was > not killed explicitly for me, then eating meat is okay. In other > words, I cannot go to one of those seafood restaurants where you > pick the fish that you want to eat, but I can order fish from the > menu or buy it in the supermarket. > > My friend said, "I am an accountant. I don't like ambiguity. So, who > is right? Something as fundamental as a precept should not be left > open for wide interpretation." > > I pondered. > > My friend continued, "Is it true that after enlightenment, the > Buddha upheld all of the precepts." I said that it was true. He then > asked, "Did the Buddha eat meat?" I said that I thought that there > were instances when the Buddha ate meat when it was given to him. My > friend said, "So then eating meat is not breaking a precept." > > So here is my question to the DSG. I agree with my friend that > something as fundamental as a precept should not be left open for > wide interpretation. However, I don't want to say that the > Mahayanists are wrong. What is your view? > > Thanks, > Rob M :-) 14441 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Sat Jul 20, 2002 10:54am Subject: Re: Vegetarianism Dear Rob., I can add a little. This question comes up because most people have not studied the deeper nature of realities. They confuse the eating of meat with a long story of an animal being killed. But at the moments of eating there may be insight into reality and this can be whether the meal is vegetarian or meat.(there may also be greed or anger or countless other realities). Sometimes people will say eating meat is like accepting stolen goods because although we didn't kill we accept the result. But it is different because unlike stolen goods life can never be returned. Or people think that if more people became vegetarian there would be less killing. Again this is unlikely and doesn't take into acount the workings of kamma. The only way to reduce killing is if we ourselves deepen understanding- then we at least will not kill. The Buddha himself accepted meat provided it wasn't killed especially for him. And this is something we can practice. I was trekking in thailand once and some villagers were going to kill a chicken for our dinner but I said we would be happy with just vegetable. This cause a slight problem as the guide said the Headman felt slighted by my refusal but I stayed firm and the chicken lived -- at least until the next group arrived. Devadatta, in order to split the sangha asked the buddha to accept vegetarianism (among other rules)for the monks (he knew the Buddha would refuse),and he also knew that people equate being a vegan with spiritual development. So Devadatta and his followers were vegetarian . Of course if someone wants to stop eating meat for some reason or another fine - but I think it is not an especially spiritual thing to do. Robert - "robmoult" wrote: > Hi all, > > I was eating a burger with a Christian friend and he said, "I > thought that Buddhists were supposed to be vegetarian." > > I said that all Buddhists should follow the first precept, to > abstain from killing. Many Mahayana Buddhists are vegetarian because > they interpret the eating of meat as indirect killing of animals. My > understanding of the Theravada perspective is that if the animal was > not killed explicitly for me, then eating meat is okay. In other > words, I cannot go to one of those seafood restaurants where you > pick the fish that you want to eat, but I can order fish from the > menu or buy it in the supermarket. > > My friend said, "I am an accountant. I don't like ambiguity. So, who > is right? Something as fundamental as a precept should not be left > open for wide interpretation." > > I pondered. > > My friend continued, "Is it true that after enlightenment, the > Buddha upheld all of the precepts." I said that it was true. He then > asked, "Did the Buddha eat meat?" I said that I thought that there > were instances when the Buddha ate meat when it was given to him. My > friend said, "So then eating meat is not breaking a precept." > > So here is my question to the DSG. I agree with my friend that > something as fundamental as a precept should not be left open for > wide interpretation. However, I don't want to say that the > Mahayanists are wrong. What is your view? > > Thanks, > Rob M :-) 14442 From: Purnomo . Date: Sat Jul 20, 2002 11:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vegetarianism hi all, I am interested in topic of vegetarian. For me, we don't kill when we eat meat if the meat(animal) has dead. If we want to eat meat then we kill the animal, this is killing. But if we buy meat in the supermarket, the meat(animal) in condition died so we don't kill. So, in the supermarket or restaurant(especially sea food restaurant) if we want to buy or eat meat so we have to check the meat. was it die or not? If it's not, and we buy it so we acted killing. The Buddha explained clearly of the first precept. There are four factor of killing: 1. There are human 2. The human is living 3. we have got 'want' to kill it 4. The human was died because we killed it If one of four factor we don't get it so we wasn't killing. We have to remember, too, that the precept(sila) have got three basics: 1. wanting(cetana) 2. self-practice 3. abstain from... For example, I hit someone and the one was died. I haven't got 'wanting' to kill him. I am still 'wanting' to 'practice' myself to 'abstain' from killing. And I hit him because it's an accident. I can't abstain. So, there are 2 basics else which I keep. may these comentary used to you happy, purnomo >From: "robmoult" >Reply->>Subject: [dsg] Vegetarianism >Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 02:11:41 -0000 > >Hi all, > >I was eating a burger with a Christian friend and he said, "I >thought that Buddhists were supposed to be vegetarian." > >I said that all Buddhists should follow the first precept, to >abstain from killing. Many Mahayana Buddhists are vegetarian because >they interpret the eating of meat as indirect killing of animals. My >understanding of the Theravada perspective is that if the animal was >not killed explicitly for me, then eating meat is okay. In other >words, I cannot go to one of those seafood restaurants where you >pick the fish that you want to eat, but I can order fish from the >menu or buy it in the supermarket. > >My friend said, "I am an accountant. I don't like ambiguity. So, who >is right? Something as fundamental as a precept should not be left >open for wide interpretation." > >I pondered. > >My friend continued, "Is it true that after enlightenment, the >Buddha upheld all of the precepts." I said that it was true. He then >asked, "Did the Buddha eat meat?" I said that I thought that there >were instances when the Buddha ate meat when it was given to him. My >friend said, "So then eating meat is not breaking a precept." > >So here is my question to the DSG. I agree with my friend that >something as fundamental as a precept should not be left open for >wide interpretation. However, I don't want to say that the >Mahayanists are wrong. What is your view? > >Thanks, >Rob M :-) 14443 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Jul 20, 2002 0:07pm Subject: Re: Vegetarianism 'Vinaya - What the Buddha said about eating meat' by Ajahn Brahmavamso http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebsut034.htm Correcting an incorrect link in my last post. C. --- "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hi Rob M, > > The Precepts, as I understand, are training rules not Commandments, > but this is a question and comes up often on discussion lists, and in > interaction with others in my life as well ... I did become a > vegetarian for a while, and enjoyed it, until I realised how many > sentient beings are destroyed (literally in the millions) for each > acre of vegetables ploughed, fertilised and sprayed. And yet, > vegetarians keep buying vegetables and fruits, or even gardening > themselves. Interesting. Everything we do can cause harm. A few > links for your weekend reading. :) > > metta, > Christine > > > On Vegetarianism http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha022.htm > > Vinaya - What the Buddha said about eating meat > http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha022.htm > > Buddhism and Vegetarianism http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha151.htm > > Buddhism and Vegetarianism - the Rationale for the Buddhas' views on > the consumption of meat > http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha069.htm > > Are you a Herbivore or a Carnivore > http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha156.htm > > Vegetarianism http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha189.htm > 14444 From: robmoult Date: Sat Jul 20, 2002 0:26pm Subject: Re: Vegetarianism Hi Robert / Christine, I don't have a moral problem with being a carnivore (I enjoy a Big Mac as much as the next guy). I guess that my problem is the difference between Theravada and Mahayana. If the Mahayanists want to introduce Kuan Yin and focus on "faith" to get to the Pure Land, I'm okay with that. To me, that is a question of style, not substance. On the other hand, the five precepts are about as "core" as you can get. Should they be open to interpretation? I don't want to say that the Mahayanists are "wrong", but my friend's accountant mind says that there should be a "wrong" and a "right" on something as fundamental as the precepts. Precepts are rules of training, but the five precepts certainly have a moral foundation (at least the first four do). Thanks, Rob M :-) --- "christine_forsyth" wrote: > > 'Vinaya - What the Buddha said about eating meat' by Ajahn > Brahmavamso > http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebsut034.htm > > Correcting an incorrect link in my last post. > > C. > > --- "christine_forsyth" > wrote: > > Hi Rob M, > > > > The Precepts, as I understand, are training rules not Commandments, > > but this is a question and comes up often on discussion lists, and > in > > interaction with others in my life as well ... I did become a > > vegetarian for a while, and enjoyed it, until I realised how many > > sentient beings are destroyed (literally in the millions) for each > > acre of vegetables ploughed, fertilised and sprayed. And yet, > > vegetarians keep buying vegetables and fruits, or even gardening > > themselves. Interesting. Everything we do can cause harm. A few > > links for your weekend reading. :) > > > > metta, > > Christine > > > > > > On Vegetarianism http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha022.htm > > > > Vinaya - What the Buddha said about eating meat > > http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha022.htm > > > > Buddhism and Vegetarianism http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha151.htm > > > > Buddhism and Vegetarianism - the Rationale for the Buddhas' views > on > > the consumption of meat > > http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha069.htm > > > > Are you a Herbivore or a Carnivore > > http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha156.htm > > > > Vegetarianism http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha189.htm > > 14445 From: robmoult Date: Sat Jul 20, 2002 0:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vegetarianism Hi Purnomo, I think that your analysis agrees with the Theravada view (my view as well). One small correction to your message, however, on your use of the word "human". The first word of the precept in Pali is "Panatipata". In his book, "Going for Refuge Taking the Precepts", Bhikkhu Bodhi explains that "pana" means "that which breaths" and therefore includes men, animals and insects but not plants. Thanks, Rob M :-) --- "Purnomo ." wrote: > hi all, > > I am interested in topic of vegetarian. For me, we don't kill when we eat > meat if the meat(animal) has dead. If we want to eat meat then we kill the > animal, this is killing. But if we buy meat in the supermarket, the > meat(animal) in condition died so we don't kill. So, in the supermarket or > restaurant(especially sea food restaurant) if we want to buy or eat meat so > we have to check the meat. was it die or not? If it's not, and we buy it so > we acted killing. > The Buddha explained clearly of the first precept. There are four factor of > killing: > 1. There are human > 2. The human is living > 3. we have got 'want' to kill it > 4. The human was died because we killed it > If one of four factor we don't get it so we wasn't killing. > We have to remember, too, that the precept(sila) have got three basics: > 1. wanting(cetana) > 2. self-practice > 3. abstain from... > For example, > I hit someone and the one was died. I haven't got 'wanting' to kill him. I > am still 'wanting' to 'practice' myself to 'abstain' from killing. And I hit > him because it's an accident. I can't abstain. So, there are 2 basics else > which I keep. > > may these comentary used to you > > > happy, > > purnomo > >From: "robmoult" > >Subject: [dsg] Vegetarianism > >Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 02:11:41 -0000 > > > >Hi all, > > > >I was eating a burger with a Christian friend and he said, "I > >thought that Buddhists were supposed to be vegetarian." > > > >I said that all Buddhists should follow the first precept, to > >abstain from killing. Many Mahayana Buddhists are vegetarian because > >they interpret the eating of meat as indirect killing of animals. My > >understanding of the Theravada perspective is that if the animal was > >not killed explicitly for me, then eating meat is okay. In other > >words, I cannot go to one of those seafood restaurants where you > >pick the fish that you want to eat, but I can order fish from the > >menu or buy it in the supermarket. > > > >My friend said, "I am an accountant. I don't like ambiguity. So, who > >is right? Something as fundamental as a precept should not be left > >open for wide interpretation." > > > >I pondered. > > > >My friend continued, "Is it true that after enlightenment, the > >Buddha upheld all of the precepts." I said that it was true. He then > >asked, "Did the Buddha eat meat?" I said that I thought that there > >were instances when the Buddha ate meat when it was given to him. My > >friend said, "So then eating meat is not breaking a precept." > > > >So here is my question to the DSG. I agree with my friend that > >something as fundamental as a precept should not be left open for > >wide interpretation. However, I don't want to say that the > >Mahayanists are wrong. What is your view? > > > >Thanks, > >Rob M :-) 14446 From: kkyaw88 Date: Sat Jul 20, 2002 2:54pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vegetarianism I do not understand all but so far as i know, Buddha solved this problem as follow: Devadad, one of the chief deciples of Buddha, proposed ten commentments. it is included that meat should not be eaten. Buddha said I have no objection. If u think u can do it, u do it. The question is why devadad cannot do it. Buddha will eat everything, whatever u eat and u offer. But if u offer shit, he will not deny if u eat shit. That is my understanding so far as i study. ----- Original Message ----- From: "robertkirkpatrick.rm" Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 7:54 PM Subject: [dsg] Re: Vegetarianism > Dear Rob., > I can add a little. This question comes up > because most people have not studied the deeper nature > of realities. They confuse the eating of meat with a > long story of an animal being killed. But at the > moments of eating there may be insight into reality > and this can be whether the meal is vegetarian or > meat.(there may also be greed or anger or countless > other realities). > Sometimes people will say eating meat is like > accepting stolen goods because although we didn't kill > we accept the result. But it is different because > unlike stolen goods life can never be returned. > Or people think that if more people became vegetarian > there would be less killing. Again this is unlikely > and doesn't take into acount the workings of kamma. > The only way to reduce killing is if we ourselves > deepen understanding- then we at least will not kill. > > The Buddha himself accepted meat provided it wasn't > killed especially for him. And this is something we > can practice. I was trekking in thailand once and some > villagers were going to kill a chicken for our dinner > but I said we would be happy with just vegetable. This cause a > slight problem as the guide said the Headman felt slighted by my > refusal but I stayed firm and the chicken lived -- at least until > the next group arrived. > > Devadatta, in order to split the sangha asked the > buddha to accept vegetarianism (among other rules)for > the monks (he knew the Buddha would refuse),and he > also knew that people equate being a vegan with > spiritual development. So Devadatta and his followers > were vegetarian . Of course if someone > wants to stop eating meat for some reason or another fine - > but I think it is not an especially spiritual thing to > do. > Robert > - "robmoult" wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I was eating a burger with a Christian friend and he said, "I > > thought that Buddhists were supposed to be vegetarian." > > > > I said that all Buddhists should follow the first precept, to > > abstain from killing. Many Mahayana Buddhists are vegetarian > because > > they interpret the eating of meat as indirect killing of animals. > My > > understanding of the Theravada perspective is that if the animal > was > > not killed explicitly for me, then eating meat is okay. In other > > words, I cannot go to one of those seafood restaurants where you > > pick the fish that you want to eat, but I can order fish from the > > menu or buy it in the supermarket. > > > > My friend said, "I am an accountant. I don't like ambiguity. So, > who > > is right? Something as fundamental as a precept should not be left > > open for wide interpretation." > > > > I pondered. > > > > My friend continued, "Is it true that after enlightenment, the > > Buddha upheld all of the precepts." I said that it was true. He > then > > asked, "Did the Buddha eat meat?" I said that I thought that there > > were instances when the Buddha ate meat when it was given to him. > My > > friend said, "So then eating meat is not breaking a precept." > > > > So here is my question to the DSG. I agree with my friend that > > something as fundamental as a precept should not be left open for > > wide interpretation. However, I don't want to say that the > > Mahayanists are wrong. What is your view? > > > > Thanks, > > Rob M :-) 14447 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Jul 20, 2002 1:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Class/Metta (and khanti) Hi Rob M, I always find it easier to pervade metta to beings I respect, love, know well - teachers, relatives, dear friends as well as categories of others who I don't know at all - refugees, horses and cows in the paddock a kilometre away. Pervading metta formally is much easier for me than in daily life. I have difficulty with someone I regularly work with who is constantly unhelpful, thoughtless, or damaging towards others. Pervading metta even when they are absent is still 'coloured' by the 'emotional flavour' I associate with the thought of them. I have had some success with changing my reactions. When feeling exasperated by the same person frequently, as well as wishing them well, I try to put myself in their position and think how I would like to be treated if I was living their life, and then treat them that way. Most people want overt respect and kindness shown to them. Most people want to be liked, and to have people interested in them. Change is often slow but I try to be consistent and kind in my dealings with them, and one or two 'small miracles' have occurred. - probably in me...... What I find most difficult is wishing or feeling metta for those I don't like or who I'm frightened of, when I am face to face with them. If I have strong fear or aversion I often try to think of them before I see them, as separate 'parts', as skin, teeth, intestines until I can realise there is no 'one' to judge or be frightened of. Then I try to see that, like me, they are subject to birth aging and death, kamma and relentless re-birth. If we are both of us subject to this same suffering, somehow they don't seem so different to me, not so scary, not so unlikeable. Metta is then often possible during an interview. Actually, it is as much Metta as Precept that is responsible for my view of the necessity to treat possums, rats, cockroaches and spiders kindly. "Just as I want to be happy, all beings want to be happy." Thus looking at non-harming alternatives to worldly pest control. It also seems to me that with Metta occurring, Khanti would also arise; and Compassion (Karuna) and Equanimity (Upekkha) would be there as well. "The Metta Sutta consists of three parts, each of which focuses on a distinct aspect of metta. The first part (lines 3 to 10) covers that aspect which requires a thorough and systematic application of loving- kindness in one's day-to-day conduct." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel365.html#ch3 The Karaniya Metta Sutta - Hymm of Universal Love. Just my thoughts, metta, :) Christine --- "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Nina, > > 75 minutes does sound like a long time, but it goes quickly. I > prepare a lot and sometimes, I go over my time. The tea break is > after my class and before Bro. Teo's class (also 75 minutes). We > then have a 30 minute break before our hour of vipassana. It is a > great way to spend a Sunday morning (8:45 – 13:00). Depending on the > subject, there can be a lot of Q&A, though Asians are nowhere near > as forthcoming as Westerners are. > > I will make an effort to meet A. Sujin the next time I go to Bangkok. > > I really appreciate all the pointers to additional material that you > have given me. I would say that I feel very lucky to have stumbled > across the DSG, but I can't say this as "feeling lucky" is a form of > mana (conceit) :-) > > I would really appreciate input from the DSG on practical > application of Khanti and Metta. I have lots of theory, what I am > looking for are practical tips on making Khanti and Metta a bigger > part of our daily lives. > > A sangdikha dana is a tradition in our Vihara (perhaps it is > uniquely Sri Lankan) whereby we "sponsor" a vegetarian lunch for the > monks and any other devotees who want to partake. The teacher of > the "Buddhism for Beginners" class for 20 years recently passed away > and so his ex-students (most of the teachers and adult students in > the Vihara) are performing this sangdikha dana to transfer the merit > to him. We have collected more than US$600 to pay the caterers > (that's a lot of noodles) and many people are bringing additional > food as well. There are a lot of people at the Vihara, so the food > won't go to waste. > > The classes are in Malaysia, but I travel to China for work. Most of > China (except Tibet) is Mahayana, but there is some Theravada in > Yunnan province (Kunming). So far, I don't have any Dhamma-friends > in China. > > Thanks, > Rob M :-) > > > --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob M, > > Excellent that you want the Abh study relevant for daily life. 75 > minutes is > > long, is there a tea break? It would help if the 75 minutes are > spent by way > > of question and answer related to the subject. I hope you can meet > A. Sujin > > one day, you are in the region. > > Now you have quite a list, and it may be good if you remind us all > of the > > next topic, one at a time. Because it is really useful and > interesting to > > see what different people write and what points they stress in > accordance > > with their accumulations. > > So, the next one is adosa: khanti and metta. Nothing is really > easy I find, > > especially when it comes to the practice. You may like the Roots > of Good and > > Evil, Ven. Nyanaponika, Wheel, 251-253. Also under useful posts > you may find > > the subjects of metta and patience. Or A. Sujin's book which I > translated: > > Metta, Loving kindness in Buddhism, which is on line: Zolag. She > gives > > guidance on the development of metta and points out the > impediments. I shall > > select some of her points, but I do hope others in this forum will > help > > also, especially handing out examples from daily life. That is > what you > > want, you have plenty of books already. > > You could also try my "Perfections leading to Enlightenment", on > Abh. Org. > > web. It could give you ideas about metta, upekkha, etc. > > It is difficult to treat a subject in isolation, everything is > connected > > with everything. When you speak about metta, TMt is also hard at > work. When > > you speak about the abstinences you have to speak about metta, > which is very > > necessary for abstention from evil. It is all most intricate. > > What is sangdikha dana? Is the class in China? You have to travel > a lot. > > Best wishes, > > Nina. > > 14448 From: Sarah Date: Sat Jul 20, 2002 1:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Frankfood Hi Frank, --- frank kuan wrote: > > Hi Sarah, > Among the excerpts you listed, I did not see my > favorite one. The one about the 2 parents and their > only beloved child crossing the desert in a famine. > I'll refrain from mentioning details, as I know some > of us on dsg are kind of squeamish. But that simile is > awesome in putting into perspective what role eating > should constitute in our lives. Yes, I think I hesitated too and left it out of my Vism ref (I think only).. As it is of significance to you, I'd appreciate a brief summary and yr comments as to why you find it awesome and not 'squeamish'....you can always put a warning at the top;-)Thanks in advance. ***** I'm in a Bondi internet caf and just printing out messages to read later. (....freeeeezing water, not much surf for Jon, but calm, clear water and winter sun for me as well as great yoga classes and healthy food with old friends...hmmm - more lobha;-)) Sarah (Sydney) ======= 14449 From: robmoult Date: Sat Jul 20, 2002 1:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Class/Metta (and khanti) Hi Christine, I like your input. I am going to collect a number of people's perspectives and summarize them for the class. I remember the following exchange at a Dhamma talk on Metta: Layperson: There is a person at work who really annoys me. I have been radiating metta to her for some time, but her behaviour hasn't changed. What should I do next? Monk: First, recognize that the problem is in you, not in them. Focus on your reaction, not their behaviour. Your reaction creates kamma for you, just as their behaviour creats kamma for them. Secondly, do you really believe that sitting in your room thinking about somebody else is going to change them? Do you believe that there is some sort of psychic lightning that jumps from your mind to theirs? Your metta meditation should motivate YOU to ACTION. Go to that person that you do not like and do something nice for them... something really nice. Have your actions motivated by metta. This will change their behaviour and create good kamma for you. Thanks, Rob M :-) --- "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hi Rob M, > > I always find it easier to pervade metta to beings I respect, love, > know well - teachers, relatives, dear friends as well as categories > of others who I don't know at all - refugees, horses and cows in > the paddock a kilometre away. Pervading metta formally is much > easier for me than in daily life. I have difficulty with someone I > regularly work with who is constantly unhelpful, thoughtless, or > damaging towards others. Pervading metta even when they are absent is > still 'coloured' by the 'emotional flavour' I associate with the > thought of them. I have had some success with changing my reactions. > When feeling exasperated by the same person frequently, as well as > wishing them well, I try to put myself in their position and think > how I would like to be treated if I was living their life, and then > treat them that way. Most people want overt respect and kindness > shown to them. Most people want to be liked, and to have people > interested in them. Change is often slow but I try to be consistent > and kind in my dealings with them, and one or two 'small miracles' > have occurred. - probably in me...... What I find most difficult is > wishing or feeling metta for those I don't like or who I'm frightened > of, when I am face to face with them. If I have strong fear or > aversion I often try to think of them before I see them, as > separate 'parts', as skin, teeth, intestines until I can realise > there is no 'one' to judge or be frightened of. Then I try to see > that, like me, they are subject to birth aging and death, kamma and > relentless re-birth. If we are both of us subject to this same > suffering, somehow they don't seem so different to me, not so scary, > not so unlikeable. Metta is then often possible during an > interview. Actually, it is as much Metta as Precept that is > responsible for my view of the necessity to treat possums, rats, > cockroaches and spiders kindly. "Just as I want to be happy, all > beings want to be happy." Thus looking at non-harming alternatives to > worldly pest control. It also seems to me that with Metta > occurring, Khanti would also arise; and Compassion (Karuna) and > Equanimity (Upekkha) would be there as well. > > "The Metta Sutta consists of three parts, each of which focuses on a > distinct aspect of metta. The first part (lines 3 to 10) covers that > aspect which requires a thorough and systematic application of loving- > kindness in one's day-to-day conduct." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel365.html#ch3 The > Karaniya Metta Sutta - Hymm of Universal Love. > Just my thoughts, > metta, :) > Christine > > --- "robmoult" wrote: > > Hi Nina, > > > > 75 minutes does sound like a long time, but it goes quickly. I > > prepare a lot and sometimes, I go over my time. The tea break is > > after my class and before Bro. Teo's class (also 75 minutes). We > > then have a 30 minute break before our hour of vipassana. It is a > > great way to spend a Sunday morning (8:45 – 13:00). Depending > on > the > > subject, there can be a lot of Q&A, though Asians are nowhere near > > as forthcoming as Westerners are. > > > > I will make an effort to meet A. Sujin the next time I go to > Bangkok. > > > > I really appreciate all the pointers to additional material that > you > > have given me. I would say that I feel very lucky to have stumbled > > across the DSG, but I can't say this as "feeling lucky" is a form > of > > mana (conceit) :-) > > > > I would really appreciate input from the DSG on practical > > application of Khanti and Metta. I have lots of theory, what I am > > looking for are practical tips on making Khanti and Metta a bigger > > part of our daily lives. > > > > A sangdikha dana is a tradition in our Vihara (perhaps it is > > uniquely Sri Lankan) whereby we "sponsor" a vegetarian lunch for > the > > monks and any other devotees who want to partake. The teacher of > > the "Buddhism for Beginners" class for 20 years recently passed > away > > and so his ex-students (most of the teachers and adult students in > > the Vihara) are performing this sangdikha dana to transfer the > merit > > to him. We have collected more than US$600 to pay the caterers > > (that's a lot of noodles) and many people are bringing additional > > food as well. There are a lot of people at the Vihara, so the food > > won't go to waste. > > > > The classes are in Malaysia, but I travel to China for work. Most > of > > China (except Tibet) is Mahayana, but there is some Theravada in > > Yunnan province (Kunming). So far, I don't have any Dhamma- friends > > in China. > > > > Thanks, > > Rob M :-) > > > > > > --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: 14450 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Jul 20, 2002 1:57pm Subject: RE: [dsg] ADL ch. 16 (1) Larry and Rob Mnan HI Larry, > -----Original Message----- > > Dear Kom and Howard, I was trying to get you > guys to debate one another, > > not debate me. The issue is how do you > understand the difference > > between nama and rupa (this differentiation > being a key 'first step' on > > the path of purification, I think?). > > > ------------------------------------------ > Howard: > It seems easy to me to distinguish mental > (nama) from physical (rupa). > At least I don't believe I confuse them. Desires, > aversions, feelings, > thoughts, memories, and discernment (vi~n~nana) > itself are experienced quite > differently from sights, sounds, tastes, > hardness/softness, pressures, aches, > textures etc. ----------------------------------------------- Kom: Why would you want a debate on something that cannot be proven to you (phenomenonlism vs ???), and in my opinion, isn't all that helpful. I think you may want to study the texts yourself to see what the Buddha said. I do like Howard's description of the differences between Nama and Rupa above. > As I understand it, phenomenalism is > simply the position that all > that is known or knowable is what is experienced, > and radical phenomenalism > amounts to the mix of phenomenalism with > pragmatism which says that whatever > is in principle unknowable is, for all intents > and purposes, nonexistent. Kom: My understanding of the buddha's teachings is slightly different: whatever is in principle unknowable is unimportant (not necessarily non-existent), as it cannot be the foundation of sati. > Experience, at least the dualistic > experience of worldlings, consists > of what Bhikkhu ~Nanananda, in his commentary on > the Kalakarama Sutta, refers > to as the vi~n~nana-namarupa "vortex", that > meeting point of citta and > arammana where there is merely the seen, the > heard, the tasted, the smelled, > the touched, and the cognized (i.e., namarupa) > co-occurring with the act of > discernment (i.e., vi~n~nana), two sheaves > mutually supporting each other. > -------------------------------------------------- Kom: Based on the teachings of the Abhidhamma (patthana: the 24 major conditions), I would have to say that Howard's position (if I understand correctly) is not consistent with the teachings. The teachings assert that although Nama is conditioned by the rupa, the rupa is not necessarily conditioned by the nama. For example, for an outside visible object (not connected to the body), the visible object conditions the seeing citta to arise, but the seeing citta doesn't condition the visible object in anyway. There are some occurances where nama and rupa (not necessarily *cognized* nama) are mutual dependent, but it isn't always. Again, you may want to see for your self what the Buddha has taught, instead of relying on either of our positions. > Howard: > I don't see why. The fact that citta and > arammana (and the object may > be either nama or rupa) are interdependent, > doesn't make either of them > fictitious. It merely makes them two opposing > aspects of one experiential > event. Think of a box: there is no inside without > an outside, and no outside > without an inside, but that doen't make either of > these fictitious (to use a > conventional analogy). > -------------------------------------------------------- Howard, I appreciate the careful clarity of what you write, as always. kom 14451 From: frank kuan Date: Sat Jul 20, 2002 2:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Frankfood about the parents and their only child crossing the desert in a famine: --- Sarah wrote: > As it is of significance to you, I'd appreciate a > brief summary and yr > comments as to why you find it awesome and not > 'squeamish'....you can > always put a warning at the top;-)Thanks in advance. > ***** The simile (which one can read in the visudhimagga) really puts into perspective the role of eating and what priority it should have in our precious and fragile life. I think it's pretty clear without any commentary, if people can put aside their cultural biases and attachments to a limited defintion of morality. -fk 14452 From: Howard Date: Sat Jul 20, 2002 10:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] rupas out there Hi, Robert - In a message dated 7/19/02 9:06:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time, robertk writes: > Sound arises because it is conditioned to arise - whether it is > experienced or not. > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: What *is* unheard sound? To me, all sounds are heard by some sentient being or other (not necessarily me - I'm not a solipsist). The physicist will say that sound is a wave which is the propagation of compaction and rarefaction of molecules. But that is all pa~n~nati, isn't it? What is the paramattha dhamma called a sound, and where is it when not heard? ---------------------------------------------------- For example, while I am writing this my son just > > came in and asked a question. You can't hear these sounds - in this > case called vacivinnati(verbal intimation) but I can assure you > there was sound and that indeed I experience sounds everyday. > ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't doubt it. ---------------------------------------------------- Even > > though you don't experience those sounds doesn't make them less real. > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: Of course. when you hear sounds those are actual sounds that you hear. But when no sentient being hears a sound, where and what do you mean by a 'sound'? ========================== 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) 14453 From: Immortal Date: Sat Jul 20, 2002 2:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vegetarianism I rarely comment on this group, but on the topic of vegetarianism I know a decent amount. There are many tales of the buddha being welcomed into feasts and eating meat. It comes down to the ever-changing reality. Each reality, each belief is different from person to person. If, a person believes that killing is wrong, and eating meat is wrong than they are right. But, if you kill to survive and eat meat to survive