15800 From: kenhowardau Date: Thu Sep 19, 2002 11:09pm Subject: [dsg] Re:dukkha Dear Nina, You referred to my previous ramblings - > A recent quote from Nina (and K.Sujin), was; "Visible > object is just what appears through the eyes, that is > all." I'm wondering if that could be paraphrased as; > "Dukkha -- ultimate conditioned reality -- is just birth, > decay, death, etc., that is all." And you said; ------------- N: > I did not have this in mind, I wanted to stress something else. > --------------- K: You then gave a further explanation of the quotation which, I think, I followed reasonable well, and you added: ------------- N: > We should go step by step. We neglect to be aware of feeling, it is only a nama which feels. We are not aware of feeling, because we are immediately carried away by our pleasant or unpleasant feeling. These are conditions for being deluded by stories of people we like or dislike, keeping them in our thoughts endlessly. > ------------ K: How would you paraphrase the original quotation to make it apply to feeling? I'd have a go myself but I think I've done enough damage to it already. You conclude by asking: -------------- N: > What is your idea about this? > --------------- K: Well, I get the idea that what I said in my last message must have been horribly wrong and you are tactfully salvaging your quotation from the mess :-) It wouldn't be the first time that my theorising has led me in the wrong direction. I had the idea that the Buddha's explanation of the First Noble Truth could be read in the same way as your explanation of visible object (with some paraphrasing of course). Now, I'm wishing I had left that alone. Thank you for your additional explanations. Unfortunately, I don't have any profound ideas to add. I will gladly spend more time considering seeing and feeling, and less time theorizing :-) Kind regards Ken H 15801 From: Sarah Date: Fri Sep 20, 2002 0:37am Subject: Concepts & Realities in Plain English <2> Dear All, I mentioned that “It’s easy to comprehend that seeing is different from hearing or smelling at an intellectual level at least. It may be a little harder to comprehend that seeing is different from what is seen.” Even a small child can tell you that seeing and hearing are not the same. What a child does not know is that when we open our eyes, there is merely the visual experiencing or seeing of its object. What a child also cannot tell you is that there is only one kind of experiencing at a time. There cannot be seeing and hearing together. If we merely judge the truth by our own ignorant perception or apparent experience, we will take the illusion of these experiences occurring together --and also the illusion of it being oneself that does the experiencing -- for being the truth. In other words, we are very used to having ideas about life and reality and have held these ideas for a very long time - countless lifetimes in fact. So when we read that the Buddha encourages us to test out the truth according to experience, this doesn’t mean according to the illusory concepts and ideas with which we’re used to seeing the world in ignorance. What it means is that we need to know more about the actual phenomena, the kinds of consciousness -- like seeing -- which experience or cognize objects and the objects themselves -- like visible objects -- which are experienced and without which there cannot be any experiencing. When there is the idea of any other agent involved or object being cognized at this time, we can ask how they cognize or how they are known. For example, if we think there is a self that sees now, while we look at the computer, how does this self see? What is it that sees? Similarly, if we think that there is a computer seen, how is this experienced through the eyes or is it experienced another way? Slowly we begin to find out that much of what we take for consciousness and direct knowledge are in fact just thoughts or ideas or concepts. The reason it matters is because it is only by beginning to clear up these illusions that the truth about experience can be known. So aren’t these just more views? How can we know realities are not self? Isn’t it a kind of dualism to talk about seeing and visible objects? Are all concepts bad? ***** Sarah ===== 15802 From: Frank Kuan Date: Fri Sep 20, 2002 7:11am Subject: What would Ms. Manners do in cyberspace? Re: [dsg] Meeting in Niagara Falls I'm trying to understand something. I've noticed that people always seem to apologize or ask permission for butting into a an email conversation on a forum. I know in a real live conversation, it's considered rude and definitely annoying to have a one on one dialogue interrupted by someone. Etiquette in a live conversation calls for something like, "excuse me for interrupting..." But why on a group forum where people tend to be addressing more than one person anyway? And if you're going to apply real life etiquette in cyberspace, shouldn't you go all the way? For example: --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Jim, may I butt in? > There are three meanings of satipatthana: Shouldn't Nina have stopped at, "may I butt in", waited a few days for Jim to respond by email, "yes you may", or "absolutely not", before proceding to launch into a full post response? Isn't it quite presumptuous of Nina? Is this not a breach of etiquetee? On an email list, I've always operated under the assumption that the rules are slightly different. Since everyone on the list reads a "one on one" dialogue, it's not really "one to one". It's "one to all". As such, no prelude of the form "pardon me for interrupting" seems necessary. And yet, since everyone except me seems to employ this [unnecessary IMHO] etiquette, it makes me actually stop for a tiny infitessimal cheetah and question myself as to whether I'm acting like an obnoxious boor by constantly barging in on cyberspace conversations without the courteous warning. Maybe I need to conform? In fact, if I'm going to employ real world etiquette in cyberspace, maybe I shouldn't be typing this message in front of my computer while naked. After all, I wouldn't normally walk around a party like that. And maybe you all are just silly humans overdoing it with the polite thing. -fk note to moderators: suttas are actually just a skillful way of teaching abidhamma, physics and biochemistry is actually abidhamma, and when I post an article about netiquetee it's actually a skillful way of teaching abidhamma as well. And for extra insurance, I made a reference to cheetah mind moment in this post. So there! I'm on topic, you can't stop me. 15803 From: Jim Anderson Date: Fri Sep 20, 2002 8:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meeting in Niagara Falls Dear Nina and Sarah, Thank-you for your replies. I would like to take the time to read them over carefully and think about how best to respond so it may be awhile before I get back to you on this matter. And yes, Nina, you or anyone else may butt in. Thanks for bringing up the three meanings of satipatthana which I have never done a thorough study of but was aware of them. The distinctions between the three still remain unclear to me. I find the first meaning interesting as it uses the term 'satigocara' (the domain of mindfulness). 'gocara' had come up for discussion in Niagara Falls regarding the term 'paramattha' which has an alternative meaning of something like 'the domain of ultimate '. I noticed that the Ven. Soma did not translate the section on the three meanings in his The Way of Mindfulness (at least in my edition), but ~Naa.namoli has a translation of a parallel passage in the Vibhanga commentary. I think it would be very good to do an in-depth study of the Pali original which is about a page long. Best wishes, Jim 15804 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Sep 20, 2002 10:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts & Realities in Plain English <1> Dear Sarah, very essential points and they are good for all of us to consider again and again. Just one remark, see below. op 19-09-2002 09:11 schreef Sarah op sarahdhhk@y...: > > It’s easy to comprehend that seeing is different from hearing or smelling > at an intellectual level at least. It may be a little harder to comprehend > that seeing is different from what is seen. When we close our eyes, > nothing is seen. When we open our eyes, the objects which are seen, are > seen by visual experiencing or seeing. The visible objects and the > experiencing of them are quite different and have different qualities or > characteristics from each other. > > Again, when we talk now about ‘eyes’, ‘objects’, ‘consciousness’, we are > using concepts. Some of these concepts, however, represent what is acual > or real, even though at this moment, there may not be any direct knowledge > of the actual or real. > > Perhaps we can at least comprehend that the talking and thinking about > seeing or visible objects is not the same as the actual seeing or > experiencing of these objects. N: That is a very good remark! While we talk and think about seeing, we forget that there is seeing right now. The visible world could not appear through eyes if there were no citta which experiences it, seeing. It sounds simple, but do we really understand this? Mindfulness of the characteristics of seeing and visible object is indispensable, so that understanding can directly know them as they are. But this is another step that you will explain later on. Please continue with this. P.S. I liked very much your and Rob M's reports on the conversations in Hongkong. Best wishes from Nina. 15805 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Sep 20, 2002 10:00am Subject: Perfections, Ch 5,Wisdom, no. 10 Perfections, Ch 5, Wisdom, no. 10 We read further on in the Commentary to the Dasannaka Jataka: When the King had heard the words of the wise Åyura, he thought, ³I have said that I would give the queen to the son of the household priest, and so I have done what is very hard to do.² Hence his sorrow at heart became a little lighter, since he had done what was hard to do. The King wondered whether there was something else harder to do than saying, ³I shall give something to someone else². He reflected that speaking in such a way is difficult, but he wondered whether there was something else more difficult. Thereupon the King asked the wise Pukkusa (in the third stanza) whether there was anything else more difficult to do than saying that one would give something away. Thereupon the wise Pukkusa spoke, in order to solve this problem, the fourth stanza: ³People do not value words that are vainly spoken, and that are without effect. But when someone makes a promise and can decrease clinging, this is more difficult than swallowing a sword or merely promising something.² This passage deals with sincerity, with truthfulness pertaining to one¹s thinking and to the words one has spoken. Thus, someone may say that he shall give, but it is more difficult to truly give. When confidence in kusala, saddhå, arises, someone may well say that he shall give, but it may happen that he does not give. It is more difficult to act according to one¹s promise. When there is sincerity and truthfulness someone is able to follow up in action what he has promised. We read that the wise Pukkusa said: ³All other things are easy to do, King Mågadha, I have answered you.² The King, when he had heard this, considered, ³I first said, ŒI will give the queen to the priest¹s son,¹ and and then I did according to my word and gave her; surely I have done a difficult thing.² So his sorrow became lighter. We see that the King could give up attachment. He could take action in accordance with the words he had spoken. This is harder to do than swallowing a sword of thirtythree inches long. We read: Then it came to his mind: ³There is no one wiser than wise Senaka, I will ask this question of him. Senaka would be in his last life the Sammåsambuddha, the Exalted One. The King asked wise Senaka, ³What is harder to do than giving something away?² Wise Senaka, when he answered the King¹s question, spoke the sixth stanza: If a man should give a gift, whether small or great, in charity, Nor regret the giving afterwards, nor sorrow about it. Not having regret is harder than swallowing a sword. It is harder than saying that one will give, It is harder than giving what is dear to one, All other things are easier to do than this. King Magadha, I have answered you.² When the King had heard the words of the Bodhisatta, he reflected, ³When I gave the queen to the priest¹s son I had sorrow about this, and this is not proper. If the queen loved me she would not forsake her kingdom and flee away. But since she acted like this, of what use is it to have sorrow about her?² When the King reflected in this way all his sorrow disappeared as a drop of water falling off from a lotus leaf. At that moment he was cured of his sickness and became well and happy. He praised the Bodhisatta and spoke the last stanza: ³Wise Åyura and wise Pukkusa answered my questions. The answer of wise Senaka solved my problems completely, saying, Œwhen one gives something, one should not regret it afterwards.¹ ² The King who was delighted praised him and gave him an abundance of gifts. When the Buddha gave this Dhamma discourse, he explained the true Dhamma and finally told the story of this Jåtaka to a monk who wanted to leave the Order because he was tempted by his former wife. In a former life he was the King, and now he attained the first stage of enlightenment, the stage of the sotåpanna. The Buddha said that Mahå-Moggallåna was wise Åyura and Såriputta wise Pukkusa, and that he, the Tathågata, was wise Senaka. 15806 From: Date: Fri Sep 20, 2002 2:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Meditation and Satipatthana Hi Jon, I have forgotten what exactly we were arguing about, but I re-read the satipatthana sutta and, for what it's worth, the only thing that looks like meditation is mindfulness of in and out breathing. Furthermore, there isn't anything about mindfulness of rupas in the abhidhamma sense in the mindfulness of body section. No sight, sound, taste, smell, or touch. So the whole thing is a bit of a mystery. Definitely needs more study. I guess what I meant by "formal" is"stiff." Go figure... Larry 15807 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Sep 20, 2002 2:44pm Subject: What would Ms. Manners do in cyberspace? Re: [dsg] Meeting in Niagara Falls Hello Frank, and All, Such blunt, no frills honesty ...Any Australian ancestors there? Scary, Frank, and you're getting closer geographically too :) I tend to agree with you that messages sent to a public list with hundreds of members become 'visible object of seeing' and should be meant for general consumption, and general reply. Members have the option of clicking on an individual's private email address if, for some reason, they wish it to be only a private conversation. (And, if so, why start off publicly). Sometimes I hope for a particular person to answer a post, when I know that person has knowledge in a particular area, or that I understand Dhamma more easily from the way they express their knowledge. But even in a face-to-face group conversation on a serious subject, one waits for an opportune moment and gives and receives visual clues as to the acceptable time to smoothly enter the conversation ... particularly if the interchange has been going on for some time between a couple of the group's members. As we can't give those visual body language clues, many persons feel it courteous to insert an initial sentence in an email instead. We are all the products of our culture, age group and conditioning. Courtesy is expressed very differently in different cultures, even if speaking the same 'root' language, as I know that you know. What is seen as the epitome of polite, kind, well-bred behaviour in one country can be regarded with embarrassment and even disdain as crass and insensitive by another culture, or as tedious and artificial and totally unnecessary. The newer cultures such as US and OZ tend to want to 'cut to the chase' and do away with what they see as unnecessary verbiage. That's just our conditioning, it doesn't make us any more right or sensible. At work (with 60 different ethnic groups) we must compulsorily complete multi-cultural training courses, but as these are fairly general, staff manage unintentionally to offend people on a daily basis. Traditions around gender of patient and professional, respect, who speaks and in what order, how much talking is necessary before bringing up the purpose of the interview, medical procedures, losing face, birth, death, food, eye contact, touching, humour ... and so on and on ad infinitum can cause grievous offense - and usually one doesn't even know as people are too polite to mention it. :) You are never an obnoxious boor Frank - I can always be sure to get honesty, common sense, and a pretty fair knowledge of the Dhamma from your posts. Just one thing though - typing on the computer naked at home is appropriate, but my advice would be not to try it in an Internet Cafe - 'different horses for different courses'? And please don't try ironing clothes that way either - one slip and the pile of rupa conventionally known as Frank would not be a happy chappy! :) metta, Chris --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Frank Kuan wrote: > I'm trying to understand something. I've noticed that > people always seem to apologize or ask permission for > butting into a an email conversation on a forum. I > know in a real live conversation, it's considered rude > and definitely annoying to have a one on one dialogue > interrupted by someone. Etiquette in a live > conversation calls for something like, "excuse me for > interrupting..." > > But why on a group forum where people tend to be > addressing more than one person anyway? > > And if you're going to apply real life etiquette in > cyberspace, shouldn't you go all the way? For example: > > --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Jim, may I butt in? > > There are three meanings of satipatthana: > > > Shouldn't Nina have stopped at, "may I butt in", > waited a few days for Jim to respond by email, "yes > you may", or "absolutely not", before proceding to > launch into a full post response? Isn't it quite > presumptuous of Nina? Is this not a breach of > etiquetee? > > On an email list, I've always operated under the > assumption that the rules are slightly different. > Since everyone on the list reads a "one on one" > dialogue, it's not really "one to one". It's "one to > all". As such, no prelude of the form "pardon me for > interrupting" seems necessary. > > And yet, since everyone except me seems to employ this > [unnecessary IMHO] etiquette, it makes me actually > stop for a tiny infitessimal cheetah and question > myself as to whether I'm acting like an obnoxious boor > by constantly barging in on cyberspace conversations > without the courteous warning. > > Maybe I need to conform? In fact, if I'm going to > employ real world etiquette in cyberspace, maybe I > shouldn't be typing this message in front of my > computer while naked. After all, I wouldn't normally > walk around a party like that. And maybe me! must be something I had from dinner> you all are > just silly humans overdoing it with the polite thing. > > -fk > > note to moderators: suttas are actually just a > skillful way of teaching abidhamma, physics and > biochemistry is actually abidhamma, and when I post an > article about netiquetee it's actually a skillful way > of teaching abidhamma as well. And for extra > insurance, I made a reference to cheetah mind moment > in this post. So there! I'm on topic, you can't stop > me. 15808 From: Date: Fri Sep 20, 2002 2:57pm Subject: study thread Dear group, Since the correct understanding of the satipatthana sutta seems to be of interest and confusion to many here, why don't we take Soma Thera's trans. of the sutta and commentary, including the introduction and preface as our next study thread. If we are in agreement, it would also be helpful if additional materials pertaining to issues such as 'objects of satipatthana' etc. be introduced in the appropriate place by people who have views they think essential to the understanding of the sutta. In other words, if there are points not specifically covered in the sutta and commentary that someone thinks is essential or helpful in understanding satipatthana, that person should take the responsibility to provide short selections from a text for discussion. What's the view, yea or nay? More importantly, who will volunteer to post it in bite size pieces? Larry http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html 15809 From: Sarah Date: Fri Sep 20, 2002 3:50pm Subject: Re: What would Ms. Manners do in cyberspace? Re: [dsg] Meeting in Niagara Falls Hi Frank, As usual you have me laughing and Christine's written an excellent reply (I doubt Frank's into ironing, though, Chris). Frank, I hope your computer room isn't overlooked by the neighbours as mine is, but then maybe that's half the fun;-) I think of the "may I butt in?" followed by the immediate butting in as being like the live "may I interrupt?" at a party, where nothing is private either....It's just an indication of courtesy and usually unnecessary as you say. I think of it as being like a 'half-way house' . It reminds me of one yoga teacher in California who always says "may I?" before touching or adjusting someone in a pose anyway. Some may fine it courteous, Others may find it over polite and even annoying. So it all comes down to checking those cheetahs again;-) Mostly when we use it on the list, we're just having fun and you're most welcome to butt in anytime on any thread without any niceties, Frank. As you suggest, the posts are written to everyone anyway. For my part, I rather appreciate Nina's and others' gestures like this one, but no reason for you or others to 'conform'. We know you're not into photo albums, SUVs (thanks Jon for the translation), or other indications of stunted spiritual progress, but you do have some clothes don't you, Frank??? We could always start a collection of cast-offs if not...... Sarah ===== 15810 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Sep 20, 2002 4:53pm Subject: Re: Concepts & Realities in Plain English <1> Dear Sarah, and all, You ask: "How can the 'actual' be known?" Would this be when there is a reality appearing at one of the six doorways, and sati (right mindfulness) is mindful of that reality, and then panna (wisdom) directly penetrates and understands it? Not sure of the 'How'. I don't think it can be 'made' to happen, maybe it's a question of knowing the right conditions, or cultivating the conditions? But how would that differ from a self controlling? You also ask: "What about anatta? What does it matter?" Without 'anatta' (which I don't understand, but which I 'feel' is the truth) I would be on one of the sweet theistic spiritual paths. Surely if there is No Anatta, there is No Buddhism. Life would be much more comfortable (and familiar) with a soul and a Deity to give commands, comfort, grant favours, control things (rather erratically), and promise to 'fix' things (for true believers only) somewhere in the future ... There would be none of this having to take responsibility and do it all 'myself' - a God to praise and implore, a Devil to blame and avoid ..... In working with patients and relatives when there is birth and death, people tend to share deep feelings regarding their ultimate beliefs in life. Many are followers of the Christ, or followers of the Prophet, or followers of the Veda and have had very significant spiritual experiences (I wonder how can that be? why is it so?) that has convinced them - beyond any shadow of doubt - that their way is the only True Path. All of them had such unmovable certainty and unshakeable faith about their experience ... what existence is all about, and what the the culmination of all existence will be. Some of them had genuine and loving concern that another might be on the 'wrong path'. If one ever gets to the point of really 'knowing' that there is no self, no person, no one; that there is nothing 'personal' that continues; that each ever changing 'process' experiences uncontrollable conditioned realities playing out whatever seeming purposelessness it is that they play out (and, if, in the midst of all this uncontrollability, the entity has 'managed' to eradicate most or all defilements (and I wonder how that can be also)) - then the entity or 'process' achieves the prize of never being born again - a difficult, incomprehensible, and wonderful goal to achieve - so I am told. This prize that is the goal, the aim, the final attainment of all buddhist practice - this is Nibbana that is indescribable but continues endlessly to be the subject of intellectual speculation. (And haven't I just substituted the words 'entity' and 'process' for 'self' .... ?) Anatta matters to me, but I still find it difficult to understand, particularly regarding kamma, progress on the path and nibbana. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > > Dear All, > > In the Suttas, over and over again, the Buddha talks about the six > `worlds' experienced through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body and mind. If > we consider the first world now, the world of experience through the eyes, > while we are thinking about `eyes', `world' and `sight', there is > thinking about concepts and ideas. > > In other words, the idea of `eyes' and `sight' is not the same as what > occurs without any thinking and without any knowledge of Buddhism when we > open our eyes. > > When we open our eyes, what experiences the world through the eyes is > seeing or visual experiencing. We can talk about the nature or the > characteristic or particular quality of this kind of experiencing of the > world, but these are different terms or convenient ways of speaking to > help us understand what seeing really is. > > It's easy to comprehend that seeing is different from hearing or smelling > at an intellectual level at least. It may be a little harder to comprehend > that seeing is different from what is seen. When we close our eyes, > nothing is seen. When we open our eyes, the objects which are seen, are > seen by visual experiencing or seeing. The visible objects and the > experiencing of them are quite different and have different qualities or > characteristics from each other. > > Again, when we talk now about `eyes', `objects', `consciousness', we are > using concepts. Some of these concepts, however, represent what is acual > or real, even though at this moment, there may not be any direct knowledge > of the actual or real. > > Perhaps we can at least comprehend that the talking and thinking about > seeing or visible objects is not the same as the actual seeing or > experiencing of these objects. > > So how can the `actual' be known? How can the dhammas taught by the Buddha > be tested and proved? How about anatta? What does it matter? > ***** > This post follows a few comments (on and off list) about confusion with > regard to concepts & realities. I hope to continue with a few relatively > simple short notes like this one. Comments or objections welcome as > usual;-) > > Sarah > ===== 15811 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Sep 20, 2002 9:59pm Subject: Re: study thread Hi Larry. I can't promise much, but I will try to read and respond to the thread. Best, Robert Ep. =============== --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Dear group, > > Since the correct understanding of the satipatthana sutta seems to be of > interest and confusion to many here, why don't we take Soma Thera's > trans. of the sutta and commentary, including the introduction and > preface as our next study thread. If we are in agreement, it would also > be helpful if additional materials pertaining to issues such as 'objects > of satipatthana' etc. be introduced in the appropriate place by people > who have views they think essential to the understanding of the sutta. > In other words, if there are points not specifically covered in the > sutta and commentary that someone thinks is essential or helpful in > understanding satipatthana, that person should take the responsibility > to provide short selections from a text for discussion. > > What's the view, yea or nay? More importantly, who will volunteer to > post it in bite size pieces? > > Larry > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html 15812 From: Frank Kuan Date: Fri Sep 20, 2002 10:07pm Subject: Re: What would Ms. Manners do in cyberspace? Re: [dsg] Meeting in Niagara Falls Hi Chris, --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Such blunt, no frills honesty ...Any Australian > ancestors there? Not that I'm aware of. My parents and their ancestors are very well mannered and polite, unlike me. I just gotta be me :) > :) You are never an obnoxious boor Frank - I can > always be sure to > get honesty, common sense, and a pretty fair > knowledge of the Dhamma > from your posts. Thanks Chris. > Just one thing though - typing on > the computer > naked at home is appropriate, but my advice would be > not to try it in > an Internet Cafe - 'different horses for different > courses'? I've always been on the leading edge of casual dressing. This is just the logical conclusion. If our species is to evolve, people will eventually catch on and follow me lead. > And > please don't try ironing clothes that way either - > one slip and the > pile of rupa conventionally known as Frank would not > be a happy > chappy! :) > What's an iron? :) -fk 15813 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Sep 20, 2002 10:11pm Subject: Re: Meeting up with Rob M <2> Hi Rob, Could you possibly explain how you downloaded all of the archives onto your hard Drive? Is there some command by which they all were loaded ino the appropriate files? When I save posts, I have to do a separate 'Save As' for each one, which results in pretty weird Netscape versions of each file, or else cut and paste into a document. If you prefer to reply off list, please email to me at epsteinrob@y.... Thanks, Robert Ep. ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > > > Even more precious than any of the texts is the work that Rob M > has done > > to make a full back-up of the entire archives of DSG to date. He > will also > > continue to back up new archives. This means that in addition to > escribe, > > there is now a complete back-up with the same numbering for posts > > (relevant for Useful Post references for example) > > and we no longer need to live in fear of any yahoo or other > calamity > > losing all these. Rob, himself, is now able to use his back-up > system with > > a search function on the road without internet access as I > understand. > > I use all these files on my PC (more than 1000 files, each with 15 > messages) as reading material on long flights. I started with post > #1 (Tue, Dec 28 1999 8:15pm) "Welcome to Dhamma Study Group" and > have been reading sequentially. I've learned a lot and gained an > appreciation of areas in which I have a lot more to learn. It is > also fun to watch the interplay of personalities. > > This is really a win-win situation, thanks to the moderators and the > posters (frequent and "lurkers" included). > > Sarah and Jon, your efforts have touched a lot of people. Many of > them (such as the people in my class), you do not even know. > > Thanks, > Rob M :-) 15814 From: Frank Kuan Date: Fri Sep 20, 2002 10:15pm Subject: Re: What would Ms. Manners do in cyberspace? Re: [dsg] Meeting in Niagara Falls Hi Sarah, You and Chris both make eloquent arguments in favor of courtesy, even if it is redundant or unnecessary. Kind intentions (politeness/courtesy) never hurts. I'll stick to being a boor. dhamma insight -> politeness can not be properly appreciated unless people on the other end of the extreme like me run around causing mischief to provide a contrast. --- Sarah wrote: > We know you're not into photo albums, SUVs (thanks > Jon for the > translation), or other indications of stunted > spiritual progress, but you > do have some clothes don't you, Frank??? We could > always start a > collection of cast-offs if not...... > Unfortunately the paradise I live in is not completely enlightened. There are some designated beaches and areas where I'm free as a bird and my bird is free to breathe the open air. When I moved here, all I brought were shorts, tshirts, a jacket for the rare occasions when the island hits the freezing point (65 deg fah.) Most of the time I only wear a pair of shorts and sandals. If it's a more formal situation, I'll put on a t-shirt. If it's a fancy restaurant, I'll grit my teeth and bear the discomfort of wearing relaxed fit baggy jeans. -fk 15815 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Sep 20, 2002 10:16pm Subject: What would Ms. Manners do in cyberspace? Re: [dsg] Meeting in Niagara Falls --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Frank Kuan wrote: > > Just one thing though - typing on > > the computer > > naked at home is appropriate, but my advice would be > > not to try it in > > an Internet Cafe - 'different horses for different > > courses'? > > I've always been on the leading edge of casual > dressing. This is just the logical conclusion. If our > species is to evolve, people will eventually catch on > and follow me lead. Well I guess that's the end of the dsg video-conferencing idea! Seriously though, Frank, I just want to apologize for jumping into your private conversation with Christine here, especially taking into account that both of you are naked, I feel it's particularly inappropriate. Apologies again for coming in without knocking first, Robert Ep. 15816 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Sep 20, 2002 10:20pm Subject: What would Ms. Manners do in cyberspace? Re: [dsg] Meeting in Niagara Falls --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Frank Kuan wrote: > Unfortunately the paradise I live in is not completely > enlightened. There are some designated beaches and > areas where I'm free as a bird and my bird is free to > breathe the open air. When I moved here, all I brought > were shorts, tshirts, a jacket for the rare occasions > when the island hits the freezing point (65 deg fah.) > > Most of the time I only wear a pair of shorts and > sandals. If it's a more formal situation, I'll put on > a t-shirt. If it's a fancy restaurant, I'll grit my > teeth and bear the discomfort of wearing relaxed fit > baggy jeans. So they DO have a GAP where you are?? Robert Ep. 15817 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Sep 20, 2002 10:50pm Subject: What would Ms. Manners do in cyberspace? Re: [dsg] Meeting in Niagara Falls Hi RobEp, I was going to begin with "Robert!! I'm Shocked!! I do Earnestly Assure You That Not Only Do I Never Type On The Computer In Such An Avant Garde Mode of Dress, but ... blah, blah, blah ...." However, I'll just settle for "You'll keep mate!" :) :) and "Moderators! where is the Dhamma focus?" <--- This Is Not Dobbing. (trans. from Oz - 'to tell on someone') :) metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Robert Epstein" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Frank Kuan wrote: > > > > Just one thing though - typing on > > > the computer > > > naked at home is appropriate, but my advice would be > > > not to try it in > > > an Internet Cafe - 'different horses for different > > > courses'? > > > > I've always been on the leading edge of casual > > dressing. This is just the logical conclusion. If our > > species is to evolve, people will eventually catch on > > and follow me lead. > > Well I guess that's the end of the dsg video-conferencing idea! > > Seriously though, Frank, I just want to apologize for jumping into your > private conversation with Christine here, especially taking into > account that both of you are naked, I feel it's particularly > inappropriate. > > Apologies again for coming in without knocking first, > Robert Ep. 15818 From: Sarah Date: Sat Sep 21, 2002 1:34am Subject: Re: What would Ms. Manners do in cyberspace? Re: [dsg] Meeting in Niagara Falls Hi Chris & All, --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Hi RobEp, > > I was going to begin with "Robert!! I'm Shocked!! I do Earnestly > Assure You That Not Only Do I Never Type On The Computer In Such An > Avant Garde Mode of Dress, but ... blah, blah, blah ...." > However, I'll just settle for "You'll keep mate!" :) :) > and "Moderators! where is the Dhamma focus?" <--- This Is Not > Dobbing. (trans. from Oz - 'to tell on someone') :) ..... Just be glad it wasn’t muesli-eating time;-) Perhaps we should add a new rule insisting that everyone (except Frank) follow my example and submit a pic of themselves at the computer to Clarify Doubts and prevent Naughty Papanca creeping into the list. Somewhere I have one of Jon with just a towel wrapped round vital parts, shaving with one hand and typing with the other....maybe still a little too Avant Garde for a Family List.* Another idea I’ve just had -- seeing as everyone (Jon & I especially) must be tired of the Dreaded Moderator Bulletins -- would be instead to have a Group Dobbing System whereby anyone can Dob anyone for the next installment of the Satipatthana Sutta or Cetasikas. What d’ya reckon? (P'haps I'd better check with my other mate first;-)) ***** So as to avoid getting dobbed myself from the very outset, let me pick up on a relevant thread of idle chatter in “Right Speech and War” which has been sitting in my ‘next rainy day for reply’ pile. Antony gave this helpful quote: Ven U Dhamminda said in "Right Speech": "There is another place in the commentaries where it mentions that not all talk about kings and thieves and ministers (and armies, dangers and wars) etc. is idle chatter - it depends on the context in which it is spoken because even the Buddha sometimes he would use them as examples to illustrate a point of Dhamma. So in the context of Dhamma sometimes you have to talk about these things - and talk about food or whatever. So it depends on the context in which it's been spoken - if it is of benefit to somebody in a Dhammic sense in order to teach them some aspect of the Dhamma then you can talk about these things." ***** For most of us, most the time, I think such talk, as Rob M was originally pointing out, is idle chatter or ‘pointless talk’, however much we may try to justify it (as I’m doing now;-)) However, I do think the Sabbasava Sutta (MN 2), with the emphasis on ayoniso & yoniso manasikara (unwise and wise attention) is helpful in this connection: “What are the things unfit for attention that he attends to? They are things such that when he attends to them, the unarisen taint of sensual desire arises in him and the arisen taint of sensual desire increases, the unarisen taint of being arises in him and the arisen taint of being increases, the unarisen taint of ignorance increases in him and the arisen taint of ignorance increases. These are the things unfit for attention that he attends to.” ***** B.Bodhi helpfully refers to some commentary notes here: 1.“MA makes the important point that there is no fixed determination in things themselves as to whether they are fit or unfit for attention. the distinction consists, rather, in the mode of attention. that mode of attention that is a causal basis for unwholesome states of mind should be avoided, while that mode of attention that is a causal basis for wholesome states should be developed.” 2. “MA illustrates the growth of the taints through unwise attention as follows: When he attends to gratification in the five cords of sensual pleasure, the taint of sensual desire arises and increases; when he attends to gratification in the exalted states (the jhanas), the taint of being arises and increases; and when he attends to any mundane things through the four “perversions” (of permanence, pleasure, self and beautiful etc), the taint of ignorance arises and increases.” 3. “MA says that up to the attainment of the path of stream-entry, attention denotes insight (vipassanaa), but at the moment of the path it dentotes path-knowledge. Insight directly apprehends the first two truths, since its objective range is the mental and material phenomena comprised under dukkha and its origin; it can know the latter two truths only inferentially. Path-knowledge makes the truth of cessation its object, apprehending it by penetration as object (aaramma.na)...” ***** Hope there’s a little more wise attention now. Sarah p.s Chris, you know, Avant Garde or Jon’s Version of A.G. would save on the ironing......;-) ========================================== 15819 From: Sarah Date: Sat Sep 21, 2002 2:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meeting in Niagara Falls Dear Jim (& Nina), --- Jim Anderson wrote: >Thanks for bringing up the three meanings of > satipatthana which I have never done a thorough study of but was aware > of them. The distinctions between the three still remain unclear to > me. I find the first meaning interesting as it uses the term > 'satigocara' (the domain of mindfulness). 'gocara' had come up for > discussion in Niagara Falls regarding the term 'paramattha' which has > an alternative meaning of something like 'the domain of ultimate > '. I noticed that the Ven. Soma did not translate the > section on the three meanings in his The Way of Mindfulness (at least > in my edition), but ~Naa.namoli has a translation of a parallel > passage in the Vibhanga commentary. I think it would be very good to > do an in-depth study of the Pali original which is about a page long. ..... Thanks for this and a good idea, Jim. I had been puzzled before when Khun Sujin had referred to the 'three kinds of sattipatthana' from the sutta and commentary notes and had not been able to find it. Now I see it at the start of the Sammohavinodani translation. By domain (satigocaro), I understand it to refer to the objects or 'foundations' of mindfulness, which is why it could also refer to paramattha as you suggest above: ".....the meaning of that is: "that on which it is founded" (pati.t.thaati) is "foundation" (pa.t.thaana). What is founded? Mindfulnes. it is "mindfulness's foundation" (satiyaa pa.t.thaana.m) which is the "foundation of mindfulness" (sati-pa.t.thaana). Or foundation (pa.t.thaana) means place for effort (padhaana.t.thaana); it is the "place" (pa.t.thaana) for mindfulness (satiyaa; gen. or dat.) that is the "foundation of mindfulness" (satipa.t.thaana), like the "place for elephants" (hatthi.t.thaana), "place for horses" (assa.t.thaana)." ***** I'll be glad to hear any further comments you or Nina or anyone else may have on these 3 meanings and any in-depth study from your consideration of the Pali terms. Sarah ====== 15820 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Sep 21, 2002 2:38am Subject: Jataka Tales again Dear Group, I didn't fully comprehend the Jataka tale (Dasannaka-Jataka No. 401 p 207 Vol iii) used to illustrate the danger and disadvantage of clinging. I find this example quite concerning. The Tale is said to teach that 'when one gives something one should not regret it afterwards'. But what did it teach about wise consideration, about giving only what ought to be given, about non-harming and not abusing power, consideration for others, morality, compassion, sensitivity, love? The story basically is about the King of Magadha and his beautiful Queen. The son of the house-hold priest goes off his food because he sees the Queen and lusts after her. (must have already tried all the usual strategies). The King sends for him, and says,"I give her to you for seven days, spend those days at your house and on the eighth send her back." (This is his wife - a human being here, not a set of hedge clippers). She doesn't return on the eighth day (and what woman would?) but leaves the country with the son of the house- hold priest. (which, no doubt, left the house-hold priest in an awkward position.) Why wasn't the King's behaviour severely criticised in the Tale? Why was the woman criticiised - she who seems more sinned against than sinning. Why should she come back knowing she might be 'loaned' out again at anytime on the King's whim? I don't think 'the great King Maddava' was such a great human being ... He says (can you believe it?) "I did according to my word and gave her: Surely I have done a hard thing" (I won't comment on that) AND "If she loved me she would not forsake her kingdom and flee away: what have I to do with her when she has not loved me but fled away?" (Good Grief!!) I don't understand the Bodhisatta's behaviour in the story. And did the Buddha really use this story and tell a Brother "That woman does you harm: formerly too you were dying of mental sickness owing to her, and got life owing to wise men." Somehow, I don't think 'different times, different cultures' quite explains this story. metta, Christine 15821 From: Sarah Date: Sat Sep 21, 2002 2:40am Subject: Re: [dsg] study thread Hi Larry (& Christine), This also sounds a pretty good idea to me - sure to lead to plenty of 'debate';-) If you decide on it, I would just add three suggestions: 1. Start with the Sutta and Commentary notes themselves rather than Soma's intro as we'd need to keep referring to the Sutta and com anyway to discuss some of his remarks. (Or quote from his intro when discussing the sutta or add it at the end for further discussion if you like). 2. As the Commentary and Sub-com are in different italics in the text, whoever posted sections would need to add a 'C: ' and 'Sub-C:' to make it clear. 3. As you did such a great job with ADL and stayed the whole course when one by one your study corner members dropped out or faded, I think you should continue posting the extracts and with this in mind, I'll happily give my vote to whatever you wish;-) If you don't want to be responsible, my vote goes to Christine to post extracts from 'Cetasikas' which I think would be very useful too. (Or maybe we could have both going along, but at a slower rate....e.g one extract from each every few days rather than two from one - I mean we're used to being confused and bombarded from different sources here and this would slow down and share your responsibility;-)) Sarah ===== 15822 From: robmoult Date: Sat Sep 21, 2002 4:15am Subject: Re: Meeting up with Rob M <2> Hi Rob Ep, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Robert Epstein" wrote: > Could you possibly explain how you downloaded all of the archives onto > your hard Drive? Is there some command by which they all were loaded > ino the appropriate files? When I save posts, I have to do a separate > 'Save As' for each one, which results in pretty weird Netscape versions > of each file, or else cut and paste into a document. > > If you prefer to reply off list, please email to me at > epsteinrob@y... I will answer on-line as there may be others wondering the same thing. I use Internet Explorer. I displayed a screen of 15 messages, showing the complete message (not just the subject line). I did a "Save As" command and it created an HTML document with a name like "Yahoo! Groups: dhammastudygroup Messages 1 - 15 of 15532". A directory of the same name was created in the directory that contained the images (advertisements, header, etc.). I can then open the HTML document off-line using Internet Explorer. Once this was done, I repeated the process more than 1000 times (mind numbing labour of love). Sorry, but there is no magic involved; just a lot of repetitive actions. Once the files have been saved on my hard disk, I can use the Windows search function to find instances of words or phrases. It is more than 100 Meg of files and I tried to burn a CD. Unfortunately, the CD burning software died because of the huge number of directories (more than 1000). I am looking for a more updated CD burning software. If I can make it work, I would be happy to send you a CD of the first 15,000+ messages (whatever we are up to at the time) if that would be of help. A small repayment for the valuable Dhamma that I have learned reading your posts. Thanks, Rob M :-) 15823 From: Date: Sat Sep 21, 2002 1:51am Subject: Re: What would Ms. Manners do in cyberspace? Re: [dsg] Meeting in Niagara Falls Hi, Christine (and Rob E, and Frank) - In a message dated 9/21/02 1:51:04 AM Eastern Daylight Time, cforsyth@v... writes: > > Hi RobEp, > > I was going to begin with "Robert!! I'm Shocked!! I do Earnestly > Assure You That Not Only Do I Never Type On The Computer In Such An > Avant Garde Mode of Dress, but ... blah, blah, blah ...." > However, I'll just settle for "You'll keep mate!" :) :) > and "Moderators! where is the Dhamma focus?" <--- This Is Not > Dobbing. (trans. from Oz - 'to tell on someone') :) > > metta, > Christine > ============================== Christine, you ask about Dhamma focus. To me it is obvious: You and Frank have reached the stage of *nonattachment* to rituals of dress, and your bodies are often *empty* of *adventitious defilements*. Frank, in particular, that Mahapurusa in our midst, has reached the stage, to paraphrase him, of being "free as a bird"! [My apologies all around! ;-) Just operating in silly mode!] With manic 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) 15824 From: Date: Sat Sep 21, 2002 2:44am Subject: Slowing Down and Using Concepts Hi, all - We've talked on-list before of whether slowing down actions (such as walking) is useful in meditating (whether we consider that meditating "formal" or not). There has also been raised the question of whether or not insight has a conceptual component or only involves a "direct" knowing. I was thinking before of a trivial, quite mundane matter which, conceivably, has some relevance to these two matters. I was remembering exactly how I went about teaching my sons so many years ago how to tie their shoelaces. I recall two aspects of it: 1) I demonstrated the tying (on their own shoes) *very slowly* and pausing after separable stages in the process, and I commented on what was happening all along. What was involved was direct observation along with hearing verbal characterization, and all at a slow and staged pace. I suspect the following: a) Had this not been done slowly, they would not have learned at all, and b) Had it been done slowly, but without stages or without verbal commentary, they would still have learned, but less quickly. (Of course, their own recognitional abilities (sa~n~na) would have been operative without my verbal comments and without my making explicit the "stages" of the process. But without slowing the process down, I think it would have been hopeless.) Now, extrapolating from this to the process of meditation is, of course, a BIG jump. Still, I think there may be some relevance, at least to early stages of meditation practice. 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) 15825 From: Date: Sat Sep 21, 2002 3:54am Subject: A Couple More Words Re: [dsg] Slowing Down and Using Concepts Hi, all - In a message dated 9/21/02 9:44:42 AM Eastern Daylight Time, upasaka@a... writes: > > Hi, all - > > We've talked on-list before of whether slowing down actions (such as > > walking) is useful in meditating (whether we consider that meditating > "formal" or not). There has also been raised the question of whether or not > > insight has a conceptual component or only involves a "direct" knowing. > I was thinking before of a trivial, quite mundane matter which, > conceivably, has some relevance to these two matters. I was remembering > exactly how I went about teaching my sons so many years ago how to tie > their > shoelaces. I recall two aspects of it: 1) I demonstrated the tying (on > their > own shoes) *very slowly* and pausing after separable stages in the process, > > and I commented on what was happening all along. What was involved was > direct > observation along with hearing verbal characterization, and all at a slow > and > staged pace. > I suspect the following: a) Had this not been done slowly, they > would > not have learned at all, and b) Had it been done slowly, but without stages > > or without verbal commentary, they would still have learned, but less > quickly. (Of course, their own recognitional abilities (sa~n~na) would have > > been operative without my verbal comments and without my making explicit > the > "stages" of the process. But without slowing the process down, I think it > would have been hopeless.) > Now, extrapolating from this to the process of meditation is, of > course, a BIG jump. Still, I think there may be some relevance, at least to > > early stages of meditation practice. > > With metta, > Howard > =========================== Obviously, the purpose of meditating is different from the purpose of learning how to tie one's shoes. In the latter case, one is merely learning an activity. In the former case, for example with walking meditation or meditation on the breath, one is learning at least the following: 1) What was originally grasped as a unity is really a composite of stages or parts, and 2) even the most elementary aspects of what was originally perceived as a substantial unity are themselves dependent on specific conditions for their arising - and they do not remain. (This is true, of course, about shoelace tying as well, but learning that fact isn't the purpose of *that* lesson.) There is also at least the following central lesson learned in the meditating: Impersonality. Breathing usually occurs without (conscious) volition, and thus obviously without an agent, and the walking occurs *with* volition, but it is "mere" volition (with no agent behind it). This latter fact, the impersonality of the volition, however, is only seen when mindfulness and concentration have risen to a sufficiently high intensity. 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) 15826 From: abhidhammika Date: Sat Sep 21, 2002 8:10am Subject: Re: Slowing Down and Using Concepts: No Need To Extrpolate Dear Howard How are you? You wrote: "I suspect the following: a) Had this not been done slowly, they would not have learned at all, and b) Had it been done slowly, but without stages or without verbal commentary, they would still have learned, but less quickly. (Of course, their own recognitional abilities (sa~n~na) would have been operative without my verbal comments and without my making explicit the "stages" of the process. But without slowing the process down, I think it would have been hopeless.) Now, extrapolating from this to the process of meditation is, of course, a BIG jump. Still, I think there may be some relevance, at least to early stages of meditation practice." You do not need to extrapolate what you demonstrated to your sons, to the process of meditation. If you observed every step of your demonstration with full awareness, that very process of demonstration became the Buddhist insight meditation (vipassanaa / satipa.t.thaana). If you kept doing that demonstration with an observant mind with full awareness as though it were your meditation practice, you would end up with pre-jhaana concentration (upacaa samaadhi) which is adequate enough for bodhi-level insight. Why would the shoelace-tying demonstration become a kind of Buddhist insight meditation? That is because Buddhist insight meditation is based on real phenomena such as matter called shoelaces, the changing manners of matter called the relevant movements of your hands and eyes, and mind that is observant of every stage of movements and changes. In short, shoelace-tying demonstration is not one thing, and meditation is not another. You can neatly carry out and conbine the two things as one process. With kind regards, Suan http://www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, all - . . Now, extrapolating from this to the process of meditation is, of course, a BIG jump. Still, I think there may be some relevance, at least to early stages of meditation practice. With metta, Howard 15827 From: Date: Sat Sep 21, 2002 4:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Slowing Down and Using Concepts: No Need To Extrpolate Hi, Suan - In a message dated 9/21/02 11:11:46 AM Eastern Daylight Time, suanluzaw@b... writes: > > Dear Howard > > How are you? > > You wrote: > > "I suspect the following: a) Had this not been done slowly, they > would not have learned at all, and b) Had it been done slowly, but > without stages or without verbal commentary, they would still have > learned, but less quickly. (Of course, their own recognitional > abilities (sa~n~na) would have been operative without my verbal > comments and without my making explicit the "stages" of the process. > But without slowing the process down, I think it would have been > hopeless.) Now, extrapolating from this to the process of meditation > is, of course, a BIG jump. Still, I think there may be some > relevance, at least to early stages of meditation practice." > > You do not need to extrapolate what you demonstrated to your sons, to > the process of meditation. > > If you observed every step of your demonstration with full awareness, > that very process of demonstration became the Buddhist insight > meditation (vipassanaa / satipa.t.thaana). > > If you kept doing that demonstration with an observant mind with full > awareness as though it were your meditation practice, you would end > up with pre-jhaana concentration (upacaa samaadhi) which is adequate > enough for bodhi-level insight. > > Why would the shoelace-tying demonstration become a kind of Buddhist > insight meditation? > > That is because Buddhist insight meditation is based on real > phenomena such as matter called shoelaces, the changing manners of > matter called the relevant movements of your hands and eyes, and mind > that is observant of every stage of movements and changes. > > In short, shoelace-tying demonstration is not one thing, and > meditation is not another. You can neatly carry out and conbine the > two things as one process. > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: You are correct - that is, I agree. ;-) You may be able to detect from my follow-up post on this topic that this subsequently occurred to me. (That is why I said there "This is true, of course, about shoelace tying as well, but learning that fact isn't the purpose of *that* lesson.") -------------------------------------------------- > > With kind regards, > > Suan > > http://www.bodhiology.org > =========================== With metta, Howard > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, all - > > . > . > > Now, extrapolating from this to the process of meditation is, of > course, a BIG jump. Still, I think there may be some relevance, at > least to > early stages of meditation practice. > > 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) 15828 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Sep 21, 2002 10:04am Subject: Re: What would Ms. Manners do in cyberspace? Dear Frank, :-) :-) :-) you gave me a good time, I had to laugh aloud, could not stop. Is that impolite? Should I laugh only off line? I liked your reference to cheetah, anyway, you do not forget that it is citta which thinks all these humorous, somewhat ironical things. But I know your good heart. You may butt in any time !!! Keep good cheer, Nina. op 20-09-2002 16:11 schreef Frank Kuan op fcckuan@y...: > --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: >> Dear Jim, may I butt in? >> There are three meanings of satipatthana: > > > Shouldn't Nina have stopped at, "may I butt in", > waited a few days for Jim to respond by email, "yes > you may", or "absolutely not", before proceding to > launch into a full post response? Isn't it quite > presumptuous of Nina? Is this not a breach of > etiquetee? you all are > just silly humans overdoing it with the polite thing. > note to moderators: suttas are actually just a > skillful way of teaching abidhamma, physics and > biochemistry is actually abidhamma, and when I post an > article about netiquetee it's actually a skillful way > of teaching abidhamma as well. And for extra > insurance, I made a reference to cheetah mind moment > in this post. So there! I'm on topic, you can't stop > me. 15829 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Sep 21, 2002 10:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:dukkha, to Ken H Dear Ken H, Your message was not , just the opposite. I tell you sincerely what was in my mind just before writing to you. I came across you last year because I was looking for a text about knowing the conditionality of phenomena, and I was thinking in this respect of 9-11, and then someone helped me to trace the text and we came to you. Since then I noticed that you always had good things to say, to the point. I was also thinking of Noosa, and the meeting at your farm with much appreciation. Then you came with this message and I thought,< how nice to have a Dhamma conversation with Ken. A pity that on line is so complicated, considering timing, and also for me keeping the telephone line. Rob K. once did this in such a lively way. Now we write something and then we have to wait for an answer. > That is why I asked in my post what you were thinking, to keep the conversation going. I also saw in your remark an opening to say something more about dukkha, but, as our good friend Frank remarked, a post is not only addressed to one person but to all (perennial lurkers included), and also to myself. Thus, don't take it personally, as criticism, I was thinking of many people when answering you. Some people do not get all the meanings of dukkha: dukkha-dukkha, painful feeling and unpleasant (mental) feeling, parinama dukkha, the changeability of things, and finally, sankhara dukkha, the impermanence of all conditioned realities which are therefore unsatisfactory. Now see below: op 20-09-2002 08:09 schreef kenhowardau op kenhowardau@y...: -------------- > K: > You then gave a further explanation of the quotation > which, I think, I followed reasonable well, and you > added: > ------------- > N: >> We should go step by step. We neglect to be aware of > feeling, it is only a nama which feels. We are not aware > of feeling, because we are immediately carried away by > our pleasant or unpleasant feeling. These are conditions > for being deluded by stories of people we like or > dislike, keeping them in our thoughts endlessly. > > ------------ > K: > How would you paraphrase the original quotation to make > it apply to feeling? I'd have a go myself but I think > I've done enough damage to it already. Nina: No question of damage. Feeling is one of the five khandhas which are impermament and thus unsatisfactory. But, I neglect being aware of feeling. >K:You conclude by asking:---------- >> What is your idea about this? > > --------------- >(snip) It wouldn't > be the first time that my theorising has led me in the > wrong direction. N: We all are theorizing, because direct awareness and understanding is another step. But first there should be right intellectual understanding of what the objects of awareness are, gocara sampajanna, right understanding of the field, the objects of awareness. Difficult for all of us. See Sarah's series on realities and concepts which I appreciate so much. Even though I know the theory, the practice is another matter. >K:I had the idea that the Buddha's explanation of the First > Noble Truth could be read in the same way as your > explanation of visible object (with some paraphrasing of > course). Now, I'm wishing I had left that alone. N:Do not leave it alone :-) It is correct that visible object is dukkha. But since this truth is so deep, it is hard to realize it in all implications. First, visible object should be known as rupa, different from nama which experiences. It is different from feeling which is nama. BTW, when we speak about the first stage of insight: distinguishing the different characteristics of nama and of rupa, we should not believe that nama and rupa have to be realized in a specific order, such as the of seeing and visible object, hearing and sound. A. Sujin explained that nobody can predict the objects of insight that appear. It may be a rupa such as hardness and feeling which is nama, it is beyond control. (I address all here, including myself) K: Unfortunately, I don't have any profound ideas to add. I > will gladly spend more time considering seeing and > feeling, and less time theorizing :-) N: That is for all of us, you said it. Thank you for this reminder, very good! I knew you would say useful things. Any ideas are most wellcome. With much appreciation, Nina. 15830 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Sep 21, 2002 10:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meeting in Niagara Falls, Rob Ep. Dear Jim, see below. op 20-09-2002 17:43 schreef Jim Anderson op jimanderson_on@y...: . Thanks for bringing up the three meanings of > satipatthana which I have never done a thorough study of but was aware > of them. The distinctions between the three still remain unclear to > me. I find the first meaning interesting as it uses the term > 'satigocara' (the domain of mindfulness). 'gocara' had come up for > discussion in Niagara Falls regarding the term 'paramattha' which has > an alternative meaning of something like 'the domain of ultimate > '. Nina: a very interesting term, gocara, field or pasture. See Vis. I, 51: Here the text refers to the Sutta of the Falcon, which I like very much. So dangerous to leave this , because akusala jumps in at once. But also akusala can be contemplated as citta in citta or dhammas in dhammas, the gocara is everywhere and always there. I am so glad this was brought up in the Niagara Falls. Paramattha dhammas are the gocara of insight. Again, I would like to refer to the importance of Sarah's series. Very basic. J: I noticed that the Ven. Soma did not translate the > section on the three meanings in his The Way of Mindfulness (at least > in my edition), but ~Naa.namoli has a translation of a parallel > passage in the Vibhanga commentary. N: Also in the Samanna Phalasutta, looking ahead, etc. we find them. They can vary at different places. J: I think it would be very good to > do an in-depth study of the Pali original which is about a page long. N: I am all in !!! How and where? If it is in the Pali study, Rob Ep will protest loudly. Best wishes from Nina. 15831 From: antony272b2 Date: Sat Sep 21, 2002 5:54pm Subject: Re: Meeting up with Rob M <2> --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Rob Ep, > > > I will answer on-line as there may be others wondering the same > thing. I use Internet Explorer. I displayed a screen of 15 messages, > showing the complete message (not just the subject line). I did > a "Save As" command and it created an HTML document with a name > like "Yahoo! Groups: dhammastudygroup Messages 1 - 15 of 15532". This can be done by going to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/messages and clicking on "Expand Messages" at the bottom of the page. metta / Antony. 15832 From: azita gill Date: Sat Sep 21, 2002 7:34pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: the lakknana rupas, impermanence --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Daer > > > dear Nina, Larry and Christine, < thanks for your comments on impermance. No, Nina, I am not more confused, now that I have more information to think about. It has taken me a while to reply; I now have a new second-hand computor which is much easier to read from, the last one was very old and had a 'wobbly' screen. < looking forward to meeting up with you in BKK in Nov/Dec. I will be there for 3 weeks. Hoping to come back home with a lot more Dhamma books than I have at the moment. < will close with another comment of Ven. Dhammadharo: < 'to talk about what Buddhist people do is not very useful to find out what the Buddha taught, bce. every individual is accumlating and has accumulated many different degrees of the 52 cetasikas. This moment of citta is conditioned by the previous citta - likewise the next moment is conditioned by this moment. Therefore the rebirth is conditioned by the moment of death consciousness. So regardless of what we think or feel about rebirth it just arises and falls away - just like this moment - until the ultimate cause is eradicated i.e. craving. < our practice is to develop the Right Understanding of realities of our daily life' < patience, courage and good cheer, Azita 15833 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Sep 21, 2002 9:57pm Subject: Re: Meeting up with Rob M <2> thanks, Antony. very interesting. Rob Ep. ================== --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "antony272b2" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > > Hi Rob Ep, > > > > > > I will answer on-line as there may be others wondering the same > > thing. I use Internet Explorer. I displayed a screen of 15 > messages, > > showing the complete message (not just the subject line). I did > > a "Save As" command and it created an HTML document with a name > > like "Yahoo! Groups: dhammastudygroup Messages 1 - 15 of 15532". > > This can be done by going to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/messages > > and clicking on "Expand Messages" at the bottom of the page. > > metta / Antony. 15834 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Sep 21, 2002 10:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Meeting in Niagara Falls, Rob Ep. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Nina van Gorkom wrote: > N: Also in the Samanna Phalasutta, looking ahead, etc. we find them. They > can vary at different places. > J: I think it would be very good to > > do an in-depth study of the Pali original which is about a page long. > N: I am all in !!! How and where? If it is in the Pali study, Rob Ep will > protest loudly. > Best wishes > from Nina. yes, I want to see it! I want to see it! : ) robert ep. 15835 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Sep 21, 2002 10:27pm Subject: What would Ms. Manners do in cyberspace? Re: [dsg] Meeting in Niagara Falls Hi Chris. And Howard, happy to see you in 'silly mode'. Dear Chris, I understand your distress, recalling that you are someone who didn't want their hairstyle revealed in the group photo some months ago! [I only have a decent memory for embarassing details.] But you needn't worry, Frank assures me all the videos have been destroyed. I'm just kidding!!! Okay, I formally request that the moderators stop me before I go O/T again. Howard, it's time to get serious again. Post a few mathematical formulae showing that Dhamma = Nibbana + Buddha(Samsara/exponent "n") and I will start ranting about the luminous mind, and things will be back to normal. : ) Robert Ep. ===================== --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Christine (and Rob E, and Frank) - > > In a message dated 9/21/02 1:51:04 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > cforsyth@v... writes: > > > > > > Hi RobEp, > > > > I was going to begin with "Robert!! I'm Shocked!! I do Earnestly > > Assure You That Not Only Do I Never Type On The Computer In Such An > > Avant Garde Mode of Dress, but ... blah, blah, blah ...." > > However, I'll just settle for "You'll keep mate!" :) :) > > and "Moderators! where is the Dhamma focus?" <--- This Is Not > > Dobbing. (trans. from Oz - 'to tell on someone') :) > > > > metta, > > Christine > > > ============================== > Christine, you ask about Dhamma focus. To me it is obvious: You and > Frank have reached the stage of *nonattachment* to rituals of dress, and your > bodies are often *empty* of *adventitious defilements*. Frank, in particular, > that Mahapurusa in our midst, has reached the stage, to paraphrase him, of > being "free as a bird"! > [My apologies all around! ;-) Just operating in silly mode!] > > With manic metta, > Howard 15836 From: Date: Sat Sep 21, 2002 10:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] study thread Hi Sarah, I could do it but I would need some help. My memory isn't big enough to read the whole book so I would need someone to send me big chunks of text and then I could break it down into daily installments. Christine, is that in the realm of possibility for you? If so, what I would need first is the "Notes." Then I could let you know when to send some more. I can get a little way into it on my own. I think we may as well plow through it like a book and begin with the preface. However, I agree it is a little difficult to follow so having your own copy of the book would definitely be beneficial. It would probably be a good idea if everyone reads the basic sutta several times. Larry 15837 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Sep 21, 2002 10:34pm Subject: Re: Meeting up with Rob M <2> --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > It is more than 100 Meg of files and I tried to burn a CD. > Unfortunately, the CD burning software died because of the huge > number of directories (more than 1000). I am looking for a more > updated CD burning software. If I can make it work, I would be happy > to send you a CD of the first 15,000+ messages (whatever we are up > to at the time) if that would be of help. A small repayment for the > valuable Dhamma that I have learned reading your posts. > > Thanks, > Rob M :-) Dear Rob M, First of all, i apologize for giving someone else credit for your maneouver. I responded to another post that quoted part of this one. Anyway, I sure would appreciate that disk. What a great thing to have handy. I happen to have some pretty advanced CD burning software, which I might be able to get to you. Send me a message off list and if you like I'll try to mail you something. And thank you so much for your statement about my posts. That is very kind. Best, Robert Ep. 15838 From: robmoult Date: Sat Sep 21, 2002 10:52pm Subject: [dsg] Speech and Intentions was (Re: Updated Class Notes Now On-Line) Hi KC, Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. The references are from Atthasalini, Book I, Part III, Section V, "Discourse on Courses of Immoral Action" Of course, there is a lot more detail in the Atthasalini than in my Class Notes. Thanks, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Rob M > > > > > Again, P.13 of Class Notes indicates the "class" of beings (see > > remarks under "killing"). "Large animals more serious than small > > animals, humans more serious than animals. Virtuous being more > > serious than non-virtuous being." > > > > k: Where do you get these references? > > > kind regards > kc 15839 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Sep 21, 2002 10:53pm Subject: Re: Jataka Tales again --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > The story basically is about the King of Magadha and his beautiful > Queen. The son of the house-hold priest goes off his food because > he sees the Queen and lusts after her. (must have already tried all > the usual strategies). Hmnn....wonder if he tried naked letter-writing.... The King sends for him, and says,"I give her > to you for seven days, spend those days at your house and on the > eighth send her back." (This is his wife - a human being here, not a > set of hedge clippers). Unfortunately you're pretty close to the mark. Also see the Inuit custom of 'wife-sharing'; and the old British 'rule of thumb' [this famous expression comes from the old British law that a man could not beat his wife with a stick thicker than his thumb.] Hedge clippers indeed! [snip] He says (can you believe it?) "I did according to my word > and gave her: Surely I have done a hard thing" (I won't comment on > that) AND "If she loved me she would not forsake her kingdom and flee > away: what have I to do with her when she has not loved me but fled > away?" (Good Grief!!) Men are always like that. They fool around and then they cry when the women leave them. "What'd I do? What'd I do?" > I don't understand the Bodhisatta's behaviour in the story. > And did the Buddha really use this story and tell a Brother "That > woman does you harm: formerly too you were dying of mental sickness > owing to her, and got life owing to wise men." > > Somehow, I don't think 'different times, different cultures' quite > explains this story. Unfortunately, that's probably the explanation. I personally don't adhere to a divine interpretation of everything the Buddha says, although his knowledge may be infallible, and I think that some stories, even those told by the Buddha, can be the product of a specific time and place where women were considered property, and were to defer to the men in their lives. It's still a bit like that in parts of India today, as well as other places in the world, so it's not so far-fetched that people would hold these distasteful views of women. For those who adhere to the Buddha's words as 100% Gospel, this is as much of a problem as similar statements in the Western Bible, such as, anyone who works on the Sabbath should be killed by stoning. But if you look at the lesson and ignore the example, you may still get the Buddha's point. He was bound to preach in terms that his listeners would understand. Robert Ep. 15840 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Sep 21, 2002 10:58pm Subject: What would Ms. Manners do in cyberspace? Re: [dsg] Meeting in Niagara Falls --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Perhaps we should add a new rule insisting that everyone (except Frank) > follow my example and submit a pic of themselves at the computer to > Clarify Doubts and prevent Naughty Papanca creeping into the list. > Somewhere I have one of Jon with just a towel wrapped round vital parts, > shaving with one hand and typing with the other....maybe still a little > too Avant Garde for a Family List.* We can handle it. Robert Ep. 15841 From: kenhowardau Date: Sun Sep 22, 2002 0:08am Subject: [dsg] Re:dukkha, to Ken H Dear Nina, Thank you for your kind and generous reply. When I compose a message, I tend to use words that convey the wrong meaning. I don't realise this until a day or so later. Because of the need for delayed proof readings, most of my posts never get sent. Sometimes I simply lose interest, other times I thoroughly delete them, thankful they never saw the light of day. Lately, I have been hitting the `send' button in an uncharacteristically, devil-may-care fashion. In my latest message, I intended to make a few jokes at my own expense. I was aware of possibly sounding like I was wallowing in hurt feelings but I sent it anyway, relying [too heavily], on those smiley faces :-) The nature of my writing disability has been cause for endless theorising and introspection. You said that theorising is OK, provided it is consistent with the Dhamma; could we say that introspection is OK provided it amounts to understanding one's own accumulations? In "The Buddha and His Teachings," Ven. Nerada mentions an occasion when some young noblemen approached the Buddha and asked if he had seen a thief who had made off with their valuables. The Buddha said, "Which would be better, to find a thief or to find yourselves?" I suppose by `finding yourselves,' he meant `knowing your accumulations,' which would be the same as `knowing the five khandhas.' I like the idea of knowing my accumulations, it is introspection without self-obsession. Lately, I have been more accepting of my inadequacies and I don't waste so much time wishing I was like other people -- people for whom it is less than a major ordeal to jot down a few thoughts and post them off to dsg :-) Kind regards and thanks again, Ken H 15842 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Sep 22, 2002 0:09am Subject: One Single Excellent Night Dear Group, It is Sunday evening here. I was printing off a page to carry through the busy day in the front of my work diary as a Dhamma reminder. Perhaps someone else may enjoy it too. This elegant and beautiful excerpt is from the translation by Bhikkhu Nanamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi of: Majjhima Nikaya 133 Mahakaccanabhaddekaratta Sutta. 'Maha Kaccana and One Single Excellent Night' "Let not a person revive the past Or on the future build his hopes; For the past has been left behind And the future has not been reached. Instead with insight let him see Each presently arisen state; Let him know that and be sure of it, Invincibly, unshakeably. Today the effort must be made; Tomorrow Death may come, who knows? No bargain with Mortality Can keep him and his hordes away, But one who dwells thus ardently, Relentlessly, by day, by night - It is he, the Peaceful Sage has said, Who has had a single excellent night." metta, Christine 15843 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Sep 22, 2002 1:08am Subject: [dsg] Re:dukkha, to Ken H Dear KenH, I understand (a little) of how you are feeling about your writing disability - perhaps I understand more than you realise ... You write something that seems to be exactly what you mean to say, to express your understanding of the Dhamma or the subtle points of a current thread under discussion to a nicety - reading it over immediately it seems to you that you have, for once, precisely conveyed your thoughts. But reading it over a day or two later (sometimes after posting), the intellectual and spiritual quality and tone of your thoughts seems to have become distorted, incomplete or trivialised. It is, without doubt, frustrating, and galling. You have such a fine intelligence and understanding of the Dhamma, as everyone who has met you agrees, and as everyone who reads your posts will know. I know that sometimes, being hobbled by such a difficulty makes you hesitant to join in or express any opinion. Please persevere, as you have been doing lately. It is to all our benefit. Even if you feel you are not saying what you intend, your posts are very valuable. I learn from and look forward to everything you write. If you feel a glaring error has been made, there can always be a follow-up post. (Each of us struggles with our own bete noire. Mine is an overpowering instantaneous emotional reaction that equally has a distorting function for up to a day or so.) As Azita says we need "patience, courage and good cheer", and as KenO often said, we should "strive on with vigour". much metta to you KenH, Chris --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "kenhowardau" wrote: > Dear Nina, > > Thank you for your kind and generous reply. When I > compose a message, I tend to use words that convey the > wrong meaning. I don't realise this until a day or so > later. Because of the need for delayed proof readings, > most of my posts never get sent. Sometimes I simply lose > interest, other times I thoroughly delete them, thankful > they never saw the light of day. > > Lately, I have been hitting the `send' button in an > uncharacteristically, devil-may-care fashion. In my > latest message, I intended to make a few jokes at my own > expense. I was aware of possibly sounding like I was > wallowing in hurt feelings but I sent it anyway, relying > [too heavily], on those smiley faces :-) > > The nature of my writing disability has been cause for > endless theorising and introspection. You said that > theorising is OK, provided it is consistent with the > Dhamma; could we say that introspection is OK provided it > amounts to understanding one's own accumulations? > > In "The Buddha and His Teachings," Ven. Nerada mentions > an occasion when some young noblemen approached the > Buddha and asked if he had seen a thief who had made off > with their valuables. The Buddha said, "Which would be > better, to find a thief or to find yourselves?" > > I suppose by `finding yourselves,' he meant `knowing your > accumulations,' which would be the same as `knowing the > five khandhas.' > > I like the idea of knowing my accumulations, it is > introspection without self-obsession. Lately, I have > been more accepting of my inadequacies and I don't waste > so much time wishing I was like other people -- people > for whom it is less than a major ordeal to jot down a few > thoughts and post them off to dsg :-) > > Kind regards and thanks again, > Ken H 15844 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 22, 2002 6:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Jataka Tales again The Buddha spoke to a backsliding monk, and thus, he would not advocate the benefit of a happy marriage, and the loveliness of women. The essence is in the stanzas of the Jataka, and the story around it is in the Commentary to the Jataka. Let us look at the essence, explained by A. Sujin: In the story there is nothing about women's rights, another culture. The ancestors of the King of Thailand had more than one spouse, different mores. I did not think much about it when reading, I thought of the lesson taught. But not all Jatakas will appeal to everyone, I understand. Kindest regards, Nina. op 21-09-2002 11:38 schreef christine_forsyth op cforsyth@v...: > I didn't fully comprehend the Jataka tale (Dasannaka-Jataka No. 401 p > 207 Vol iii) used to illustrate the danger and disadvantage of > clinging. I find this example quite concerning. The Tale is said to > teach that 'when one gives something one should not regret it > afterwards'. But what did it teach about wise consideration, about > giving only what ought to be given, about non-harming and not abusing > power, consideration for others, morality, compassion, sensitivity, > love? > > The story basically is about the King of Magadha and his beautiful > Queen. The son of the house-hold priest goes off his food because > he sees the Queen and lusts after her. (must have already tried all > the usual strategies). The King sends for him, and says,"I give her > to you for seven days, spend those days at your house and on the > eighth send her back." (This is his wife - a human being here, not a > set of hedge clippers). She doesn't return on the eighth day (and > what woman would?) but leaves the country with the son of the house- > hold priest. (which, no doubt, left the house-hold priest in an > awkward position.) > Why wasn't the King's behaviour severely criticised in the Tale? (snip) > I don't understand the Bodhisatta's behaviour in the story. > And did the Buddha really use this story and tell a Brother "That > woman does you harm: formerly too you were dying of mental sickness > owing to her, and got life owing to wise men." > > Somehow, I don't think 'different times, different cultures' quite > explains this story. 15845 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 22, 2002 6:49am Subject: slow motion Dear Howard and all, You need not tie up shoelaces slowly, no matter fast or slow: elements do not change. Seeing is still seeing, so are hardness and bodily feeling. Sati can slip in and be mindful of nama or rupa, but it is unpredictable when, doing something slowly or quickly. If you could plan sati, it would not be anatta. The conditions are listening, considering the namas and rupas of your life. Before we may have been neglectful when tying up shoelaces, but since we are talking about it (thank you Suan) there may be conditions for a short moment of sati. Best wishes from Nina. 15846 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 22, 2002 6:49am Subject: animal talk Dear Sarah, I remember late Ven. Dhammadharo telling us, when talking about kings, one can remember that even a king will die. Sarah, you remember that I was sad when in Sri Lanka there was talk about flowers instead of Dhamma talk. But this talk can be with metta and sympathetic joy, concern for the others. Even talking about naked Frank is not necessarily animal talk. Frank was born as a naked babe, and in no time there is the dying moment. When his body is burnt, there is nothing left of his beautiful attire, he is naked, and also of his naked body nothing is left. Maranasati. Best wishes, Nina. 15847 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 22, 2002 6:49am Subject: anapanasati,Part 7, conclusion. Rob Ep ***** Part 7. Perfection of Clear Vision (vijja) and Deliverance (vimutti). We read in the anapanasati sutta (transl by ven. Nyanatiloka): The same is stated about the other enlightenment factors With regard to the word seclusion (viveka), which is seclusion from defilements, we read about the meaning in the Co to the ³Root of Existence² (Mulapariyaya sutta, as tr. by Ven. Bodhi)that there are five kinds of seclusion, or abandoning: by substitution of opposite factors(tadanga pahana), by suppression (in jhana), by eradication (by the four paths), by tranquillization ( by the four fruitions) and by escape (nibbana). As regards abandoning by substitution of opposite factors (tadanga pahana), this occurs during the development of the stages of insight. The personality view is abandoned by the first stage of insight: defining nama and rupa, distinquishing their different characteristics, and by each of the higher stages there is abandoning by opposite factors. As to the words of the sutta, fading away (viraga) and cessation (nirodha), thes have the same meaning as seclusion, viveka. As to the words, ³resulting in relinquishment², as the Visuddhimagga VIII, 236) explained, this is relinquishment as giving up (of defilements) and as entering into nibbana. We read: we read that also the path is called both relinquishment as giving up and relinquishment as entering into. We read in the Co. to the Anapana Sati Sutta: The Co states that it is thus elsewhere (in other texts), but that in this sutta it is handed down that the mundane foundations of mindfulness perfect the mundane enlightenment factors, and that these perfect clear vision (vijjå), deliverance (vimutti), fruition (phala) and nibbana, which are lokuttara. Because in this sutta ³clear vision and deliverance² designate clear vision, fruition (phala) and nibbana.> Final conclusion: I feel as if I have come to the end of a long journey through this study of anapana sati. I am very impressed by the Intro to the Sutta: the foremost disciples of the Buddha, arahats, instructed the new bhikkhus. The Buddha waited with the invitation ceremony until the Komudian festival, so that the bhikkhus could attain the unattained, realize the unrealized. The Buddha explained to them anapana sati because they were very interested in this subject. He explained mindfulness of breathing in four tetrads, groups of four, each of them combined subsequently with the four foundations of mindfulness. The Visuddhimagga gives a detailed explanation of the way to be mindful of breath, to develop it so that jhana is reached. Buddhaghosa did not create this way of development himself, he was most faithful to the old traditions he found, to the teachers of old. He very seldom added a thought of his own. I do not think ,if this way of development is simplified, such as following the movement of the abdomen, that there will be jhana as result. If jhana is not reached, and there are not the masteries (vasis) in jhana, such as attaining and emerging at any time, at any place, samatha, the development of calm, cannot be a foundation for vipassana. As Jon said, And also: I would add:the bhikkhus the sutta was addressed to were highly adept, they were arahats or they had accumulations to attain arahatship. We read even after the first tetrad in the Visuddhimagga: We also read in the Vis. VIII, 155: We read about the fourth jhana, and in this jhana no breathing occurs (Vis. VIII, 209). This shows again how subtle this meditation subject is, it becomes hardly perceptible when one is more advanced, and then not at all perceptible. If we would try now to notice breathing, how could we plan to notice it with kusala citta? This shows that the very beginning is already most difficult. One may believe that breath is a concept, but now I will just repeat a Co. passage to the first tetrad: The other three tetrads refer respectively to the contemplation of feelings in feelings, citta in citta, dhammas in dhammas. As we have read, the first three tetrads deal with calm and insight and the fourth deals with insight alone. The End. ******* Nina. 15848 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 22, 2002 6:49am Subject: Perfections, Ch 5, Wisdom, no. 11 Perfections, Ch 5, Wisdom, no. 11 We can see that it is important not to have regret after we have given something away. When we have regret, it is evident that we cling and that we have attachment to the object we give away, but this object is only something outside us. In reality there is not anybody who can possess it or who can be the owner all the time. We should be mindful of the ³momentary death² of realities. When we have seen an object just for an extremely short moment, attachment to it arises, but at all moments when there is no seeing, there is no visible object anymore. Paññå and all kinds of kusala must have sufficient strength so that one is able to further develop and accumulate them time and again, for an endlessly long time, from life to life. Paññå has to be developed so that we know the nature of our citta, and understand what is beneficial and what not, when there is kusala citta and when there is akusala citta. We may have regret after we have given something away, because of our clinging. However, when satipaììhåna arises, we can notice that we cling to the nåma and rúpa that appear, and that we do not want to let go of them, that we do not want to give up the idea of self, being or person. The stages of insight are of many degrees, its development is a gradual process, because it is so difficult to give up nåma and rúpa. The ³Dispeller of Delusion², the Commentary to the ³Book of Analysis², (Ch 4, Classification of the Truths, 85), states about the fourth noble Truth, the Path: ...the Truth of the Path has the characteristic of outlet, its function is to abandon defilements, it manifests itself as emergence... The Commentary explains that apart from the Path, there is no other ³outlet², no way out, and that this is true; that it is not otherwise. The ³Dispeller of Delusion² mentions that some people deny the four noble Truths and proclaim that the truth of dukkha is different, and the same for the other three truths. With regard to the fourth Truth, the Path, the ŒDispeller of Delusion² explains that the wise know that the Path is a Truth, because it is truly an outlet. With these words it has been refuted that the Path is not an outlet, not a way out. Each time when sati arises and is aware of the characteristics of realities and investigates them so that the characteristic of nåma, the dhamma which experiences, can be distinguished from the characteristic of rúpa which appears, the Path is developed. This is the Path that is a true way out, leading to the eradication of defilements. Hence it has been said that the wise know that the Path is a Truth, that it is the only way leading to the eradication of defilements. We read further in the ³Dispeller of Delusion² about the origin of dukkha which is craving: No other source of dukkha but craving, Nor aught that source provides but dukkha: This certainty in causing dukkha Is why it is considered truth. We read further on about the origin of dukkha, that the Buddha anounced the Truth of dukkha first and after that the Truth of the origin of dukkha. He explained that dukkha would not arise without conditions and that its arising is not due to creation by a lord creator, etc. but that it is due to craving. ***** 15849 From: Date: Sun Sep 22, 2002 3:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] One Single Excellent Night Hi, Christine - In a message dated 9/22/02 3:09:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time, cforsyth@v... writes: > Dear Group, > > It is Sunday evening here. I was printing off a page to carry > through the busy day in the front of my work diary as a Dhamma > reminder. Perhaps someone else may enjoy it too. > This elegant and beautiful excerpt is from the translation by Bhikkhu > Nanamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi of: > Majjhima Nikaya 133 Mahakaccanabhaddekaratta Sutta. 'Maha Kaccana and > One Single Excellent Night' > > "Let not a person revive the past > Or on the future build his hopes; > For the past has been left behind > And the future has not been reached. > Instead with insight let him see > Each presently arisen state; > Let him know that and be sure of it, > Invincibly, unshakeably. > Today the effort must be made; > Tomorrow Death may come, who knows? > No bargain with Mortality > Can keep him and his hordes away, > But one who dwells thus ardently, > Relentlessly, by day, by night - > It is he, the Peaceful Sage has said, > Who has had a single excellent night." > > metta, > Christine > ================================ This is a beautiful sutta! Thank you. It says just enough to direct one's attention away from reminiscing and from fantasizing over what may yet be, and towards what actually happens. It is a beautifully to-the-point skillful lesson. The Mahayanists picked up on this, adding what is noticed when examining only current actualities, saying something to the effect that the past is gone, the future is not here, and the present is ungraspable. (This addition, of course, gives away what is to be directly discovered by looking! Better, I think, to look, and see, and gasp (not grasp! ;-) with amazement. 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) 15850 From: Date: Sun Sep 22, 2002 3:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] slow motion Hi, Nina - In a message dated 9/22/02 10:34:45 AM Eastern Daylight Time, nilo@e... writes: > Dear Howard and all, > You need not tie up shoelaces slowly, no matter fast or slow: elements do > not change. Seeing is still seeing, so are hardness and bodily feeling. > Sati > can slip in and be mindful of nama or rupa, but it is unpredictable when, > doing something slowly or quickly. If you could plan sati, it would not be > anatta. The conditions are listening, considering the namas and rupas of > your life. Before we may have been neglectful when tying up shoelaces, but > since we are talking about it (thank you Suan) there may be conditions for > a > short moment of sati. > Best wishes > from Nina. > ============================ Yes, seeing is just seeing, but cognizing is cognizing. (Question:What was written on the shirt of that man who just ran by? Answer: I don't know - he went by too fast!) From my experience, as concentration and mindfulness grow during meditation, events do slow down (for the meditating observer), but that stage needs to be reached. For all but the meditation master, when *commencing* meditation on any events that *can* be slowed down, slowing them down helps one get started. 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) 15851 From: Jim Anderson Date: Sun Sep 22, 2002 9:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meeting in Niagara Falls, Rob Ep. Dear Nina and Rob Ep., I think it properly belongs on the Pali discussion list, but we could make an exception and do it here if there is no objection from the members. Since Soma Thera's The Way of Mindfulness may be coming up for study here and since the threefold mindfulness passage was left out of his translation we can try to fill in the gap with our own attempt at a translation and study of it (using ~Naa.namoli translation as a guide). I think the passage occurs in five different commentaries which can be compared for its accuracy. The first step will be to prepare a text for study in an email format which I will do but I think it would be best to post just a line or two of it at a time. Any member would be welcome to participate in the discussion or the translation with comments and questions even if they don't know much Pali. A note to members: The Pali Study Group (psg) that Nina refers to is one that I set up in early February last year as a special list for members of dsg and friends who are interested in learning Pali and studying the texts in the original. It's a closed (private) list with only 15 members at present and is not so active as here on dsg. Membership is by invitation only but if any dsg member is interested in joining psg please contact me off-list at jimanderson_on@y... although there is no guarantee of automatic acceptance. I like to keep the membership to no more than 10% of the dsg total. So there is room for more members. Best wishes, Jim > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > > N: Also in the Samanna Phalasutta, looking ahead, etc. we find them. They > > can vary at different places. > > J: I think it would be very good to > > > do an in-depth study of the Pali original which is about a page long. > > N: I am all in !!! How and where? If it is in the Pali study, Rob Ep will > > protest loudly. > > Best wishes > > from Nina. > > yes, I want to see it! I want to see it! > > : ) > > robert ep. 15852 From: Date: Sun Sep 22, 2002 1:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] anapanasati,Part 7, conclusion. Rob Ep Here's an interesting article on anapanasati: http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebmed058.htm Larry 15853 From: robmoult Date: Sun Sep 22, 2002 2:00pm Subject: Re: slow motion Hi Howard, Nina and all, My sons are musically gifted (unlike their father). We have a different perspective when we listen to music. I hear music at a very superficial level. They AUTOMATICALLY hear key signatures, chord progressions, structure, etc. in real-time. They don't have to slow the music down or concentrate on the music to hear these things, it happens naturally. They were born with with a talent (from previous lives, I am sure), but that was not enough. To develop this talent, they had to study music theory and spend time practicing listening to music under the guidance of a qualfied teacher. I see mindfulness of the present moment in a similar way. We learn some theory (Abhidhamma, sati, papanca, etc.), we practice noting (meditation) and at some point, mindfulness of the present moment, in real-time, starts to occur. I am not yet able to achieve mindfulness of the present moment in real-time, but I believe that it can be done. Thanks, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Nina - > > In a message dated 9/22/02 10:34:45 AM Eastern Daylight Time, nilo@e... > writes: > > > > Dear Howard and all, > > You need not tie up shoelaces slowly, no matter fast or slow: elements do > > not change. Seeing is still seeing, so are hardness and bodily feeling. > > Sati > > can slip in and be mindful of nama or rupa, but it is unpredictable when, > > doing something slowly or quickly. If you could plan sati, it would not be > > anatta. The conditions are listening, considering the namas and rupas of > > your life. Before we may have been neglectful when tying up shoelaces, but > > since we are talking about it (thank you Suan) there may be conditions for > > a > > short moment of sati. > > Best wishes > > from Nina. > > > ============================ > Yes, seeing is just seeing, but cognizing is cognizing. (Question:What > was written on the shirt of that man who just ran by? Answer: I don't know - > he went by too fast!) From my experience, as concentration and mindfulness > grow during meditation, events do slow down (for the meditating observer), > but that stage needs to be reached. For all but the meditation master, when > *commencing* meditation on any events that *can* be slowed down, slowing them > down helps one get started. > > With metta, > Howard > 15854 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Sep 22, 2002 2:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Jataka Tales again Dear Nina, RobEp and All, Thank you for your explanations, though I don't find them altogether satisfying. The Jataka Tale in question was not about a happy marriage or the loveliness of women. It was not a question of men having a wandering eye (nudge,nudge - wink, wink). It was about a powerful man 'loaning' his powerless wife as a favour to another man for a week, with no consultation with her, no protection of her and no thought of her feelings, and then there being general condemnation (including by the Bodhisatta and Buddha) of the woman for escaping from the Person, who proceeded to dwell in insightless self-pity aided and abetted by all. I was concerned not by a modern day human rights issue - though there was an element of that too. (And human rights are timeless, whether they are granted or not) It is an issue of whether or not the old stories ought be repeated and reprinted (whether in a hard copy edition or on the internet) when the major story line is questionable and when it shows the Bodisatta and Buddha either accepting, not noticing, or acquiesing in situations that decent people today would not. I think this story and any like it, could be 'stumbling blocks' to many people spiritually. My understanding of the Buddha's teaching is that he never wavered from stating the truth, morally or spiritually. And in the time the Tale was allegedly being told (the time of the Buddha), he was often teaching on how we are to behave morally and spiritually towards each other The question for me is "Are the Jataka Tales (this one and any like it of the 550 in print) meant to be infallible and sacred revelations, literally Word of the Buddha" - IF NOT , than that (IMO) should be PLAINLY STATED; if so, if they are to be accepted with the same authority as the Suttas, then I find I am in deep spiritual trouble, as I would be placed in a position of "This I can't believe; This I won't accept". I take small comfort from Cowells' Preface to The Jataka or Stories of the Buddha's Former Births. "Jataka legends occur even in the Canonical Pitakas; thus the Sukha- vihari Jataka and the Tittira Jataka, which are respectively the 10th and the 37th in this volume, are found in the Culla Vagga, vii 1 and vi 6, and similarly the Khandhavatta Jataka, which ... is found in the Culla Vagga v. 6; and there are several other examples. So too one of the minor books of the Sutta Pitala (the Cariya Pitaka) consists of 35 Jatakas told in verse; and ten at least of these can be identified in the volumes of our present collection already published; Some of the birth-stories are evidently Buddhistic and entirely depend for their point on some custom or idea peculiar to Buddhism; but many are pieces of folk-lore which have floated about the world for ages as the stray waifs of literature and are liable everywhere to be appropriated by any casual claimant. The same stories may thus in the course of their long wanderings, come to be recognised under widely different aspects, as when they are used by Boccaccio or Poggio merely as merry tales, or by some Welsh bard to embellish king Arthur's legendary glories, or by some Buddhist samana or mediaeval friar to add point to his discourse. Chaucer unwittingly puts a Jataka story into the mouth of his Pardonere when he tells his tale of 'the ryotoures three'; and another appears in Herodotus as the popular explanation of the sudden rise of the Alcmaeonidae through Megacles' marriage with Cleisthenes' daughter and the rejection of his rival Hippocleides." <<<<<>>>> "We have translated the quasi-historical introductions which always precede the different birth-stories, as they are an essential part of the plan of the original work, - since they link each tale with some special incident in the Buddha's life, which tradition venerates as the occasion when he is supposed to have recalled the forgotten scene of a long past existence to his contemporaries. But it is an interesting question for future investigation how far they contain any historical data. They appear at first sight to harmonise with the framework of the Pitakas; but I confess that I have no confidence in their historical credibility - they seem to me rather the laboured invention of a later age, like the legendary history of the early centuries of ancient Rome." metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Nina van Gorkom wrote: > The Buddha spoke to a backsliding monk, and thus, he would not advocate the > benefit of a happy marriage, and the loveliness of women. The essence is in > the stanzas of the Jataka, and the story around it is in the Commentary to > the Jataka. Let us look at the essence, explained by A. Sujin: > something away. When we have regret, it is evident that we cling and that we > have attachment to the object we give away, but this object is only > something outside us. In reality there is not anybody who can possess it or > who can be the owner all the time. We should be mindful of the ³momentary > death² of realities.> > In the story there is nothing about women's rights, another culture. The > ancestors of the King of Thailand had more than one spouse, different mores. > I did not think much about it when reading, I thought of the lesson taught. > But not all Jatakas will appeal to everyone, I understand. > Kindest regards, > Nina. > op 21-09-2002 11:38 schreef christine_forsyth op cforsyth@v...: > > > I didn't fully comprehend the Jataka tale (Dasannaka-Jataka No. 401 p > > 207 Vol iii) used to illustrate the danger and disadvantage of > > clinging. I find this example quite concerning. The Tale is said to > > teach that 'when one gives something one should not regret it > > afterwards'. But what did it teach about wise consideration, about > > giving only what ought to be given, about non-harming and not abusing > > power, consideration for others, morality, compassion, sensitivity, > > love? > > > > The story basically is about the King of Magadha and his beautiful > > Queen. The son of the house-hold priest goes off his food because > > he sees the Queen and lusts after her. (must have already tried all > > the usual strategies). The King sends for him, and says,"I give her > > to you for seven days, spend those days at your house and on the > > eighth send her back." (This is his wife - a human being here, not a > > set of hedge clippers). She doesn't return on the eighth day (and > > what woman would?) but leaves the country with the son of the house- > > hold priest. (which, no doubt, left the house-hold priest in an > > awkward position.) > > Why wasn't the King's behaviour severely criticised in the Tale? (snip) > > I don't understand the Bodhisatta's behaviour in the story. > > And did the Buddha really use this story and tell a Brother "That > > woman does you harm: formerly too you were dying of mental sickness > > owing to her, and got life owing to wise men." > > > > Somehow, I don't think 'different times, different cultures' quite > > explains this story. 15855 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Sun Sep 22, 2002 4:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Jataka Tales again Dear Chritine, Not all details can be given in each story. You say "It was about a > powerful man 'loaning' his powerless wife as a favour to another man > for a week, with no consultation with her, no protection of her and > no thought of her feelings, and then there being general condemnation " It might seem that way when we put in our own ideas but in fact when the bodhisatta gives away his wife or children etc. he never gives unless they are ready. "Asked for his own children, wife, slaves, workers, and servants, the Great Man does not give them while they are as yet unwilling to go, afflicted with grief. But when they are willing and joyful, then he gives them. But if he knows that those who ask for them are demonic beings-ogres, demons, or goblins-or men of cruel disposition, then he does not give them away*(cariyapitaka attakatha) http://www.abhidhamma.org/Paramis-%20perfections%20of%20insight.htm These chidren and wives are also beings of great merit and they too wish to give and are ready to endure any hardship on their own path to parinibbana . The Bodhisatta gives them not though any disdain but because they are the most valued of all that he clings to. He is ready even to let go of his most loved ones. Robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Dear Nina, RobEp and All, > > Thank you for your explanations, though I don't find them altogether > satisfying. The Jataka Tale in question was not about a happy > marriage or the loveliness of women. It was not a question of men > having a wandering eye (nudge,nudge - wink, wink). It was about a > powerful man 'loaning' his powerless wife as a favour to another man > for a week, with no consultation with her, no protection of her and > no thought of her feelings, and then there being general condemnation > (including by the Bodhisatta and Buddha) of the woman for escaping > from the Person, who proceeded to dwell in insightless self-pity > aided and abetted by all. > I was concerned not by a modern day human rights issue - > though there was an element of that too. (And human rights are > timeless, whether they are granted or not) It is an issue of whether > or not the old stories ought be repeated and reprinted (whether in a > hard copy edition or on the internet) when the major story line is > questionable and when it shows the Bodisatta and Buddha either > accepting, not noticing, or acquiesing in situations that > decent people today would not. I think this story and any like it, > could > be 'stumbling blocks' to many people spiritually. My understanding > of the Buddha's teaching is that he never wavered from stating the > truth, morally or spiritually. And in the time the Tale was allegedly > being told (the time of the Buddha), he was often teaching on how we > are to behave morally and spiritually towards each other > > The question for me is "Are the Jataka Tales (this one and any like > it of the 550 in print) meant to be infallible and sacred > revelations, literally Word of the Buddha" - IF NOT , than that (IMO) > should be PLAINLY STATED; if so, if they are to be accepted with the > same authority as the Suttas, then I find I am in deep spiritual > trouble, as I would be placed in a position of "This I can't > believe; This I won't accept". > > 15856 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Sep 22, 2002 11:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Jataka Tales again Dear Robert, I can relate a little to what you are saying - For example, the only way to happiness within families as children grow towards adulthood, is for parents and children to gradually and truly relinquish each other. Any parent will know this is a hard, hard thing to do and must be consciously and constantly practised for the ultimate freedom of all. It doesn't mean not loving them in the best sense of the word, it just means there is no possessiveness, no expectations, no doomed investment in them as the sole source of one's happiness. i.e. like any truly loving relationship should be. It is a developing process - one that merely prevents worse sorrow happening when either one forcefully breaks free (usually the child). In a sense it may be even 'imposed' by the parent, slowly but skillfully, for the ultimate good of all. And when you quote "the Great Man does not give them while they are as yet unwilling to go, afflicted with grief. But when they are willing and joyful, then he gives them", perhaps it is a spiritual version of this being described (but seeming so very alien). However - I think in the instance of Jataka Dasannaka (no. 401 vol iii) the Bodhisatta was not the Giver. The Bodhisatta was Senaka 'the king's counsellor in things temporal and spiritual'. Moggallana and Sariputta were also wise counsellors of the king. King Maddava was not giving in the sense you describe above. There seems to be no spiritual process occurring. The King was a 'lender', even a 'renter', depending on what emotional 'return' he was receiving in exchange (maybe only 'Oh what a popular fellow I'll be'). He stipulated that he should get his wife back after the other man had 'taken his delight with her' for seven days. That indicates a number of things about the character of the man, 'lack of clinging' not being one of them. In the sequence of the Paramis, Giving is followed by Virtue because Virtue purifies both the donor and the recipient, and, while Giving benefits others, Virtue prevents the affliction of others. (From A Treatise on the Paramis by Bhikkhu Bodhi). King Maddava was the back-sliding Brother in the Buddha's time mentioned by Nina. The queen was the wife of the Brother (previously the King) when he was a layman. She seems to draw the short straw every time. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robertkirkpatrick.rm" wrote: > Dear Chritine, > > Not all details can be given in each story. You say "It was about a > > powerful man 'loaning' his powerless wife as a favour to another > man > > for a week, with no consultation with her, no protection of her and > > no thought of her feelings, and then there being general > condemnation " > > It might seem that way when we put in our own ideas but in fact when > the bodhisatta gives away his wife or children etc. he never gives > unless they are ready. > "Asked for his own children, wife, slaves, workers, and servants, > the Great Man does not give them while they are as yet unwilling to > go, afflicted with grief. But when they are willing and joyful, then > he gives them. But if he knows that those who ask for them are > demonic beings-ogres, demons, or goblins-or men of cruel disposition, > then he does not give them away*(cariyapitaka attakatha) > http://www.abhidhamma.org/Paramis-%20perfections%20of% 20insight.htm > These chidren and wives are also beings of great merit and they too > wish to give and are ready to endure any hardship on their own path > to parinibbana . > The Bodhisatta gives them not though any disdain but because they are > the most valued of all that he clings to. He is ready even to let go > of his most loved ones. > Robert > > > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > > Dear Nina, RobEp and All, > > > > Thank you for your explanations, though I don't find them > altogether > > satisfying. The Jataka Tale in question was not about a happy > > marriage or the loveliness of women. It was not a question of men > > having a wandering eye (nudge,nudge - wink, wink). It was about a > > powerful man 'loaning' his powerless wife as a favour to another > man > > for a week, with no consultation with her, no protection of her and > > no thought of her feelings, and then there being general > condemnation > > (including by the Bodhisatta and Buddha) of the woman for escaping > > from the Person, who proceeded to dwell in insightless self-pity > > aided and abetted by all. > > I was concerned not by a modern day human rights issue - > > though there was an element of that too. (And human rights are > > timeless, whether they are granted or not) It is an issue of > whether > > or not the old stories ought be repeated and reprinted (whether in > a > > hard copy edition or on the internet) when the major story line is > > questionable and when it shows the Bodisatta and Buddha either > > accepting, not noticing, or acquiesing in situations that > > decent people today would not. I think this story and any like it, > > could > > be 'stumbling blocks' to many people spiritually. My understanding > > of the Buddha's teaching is that he never wavered from stating the > > truth, morally or spiritually. And in the time the Tale was > allegedly > > being told (the time of the Buddha), he was often teaching on how > we > > are to behave morally and spiritually towards each other > > > > The question for me is "Are the Jataka Tales (this one and any like > > it of the 550 in print) meant to be